LIBRARY 


University  of  California. 


Class 


lit 


V 


THE  SENTENCE  STRUCTURE 
OF  VIRGIL 


BY 

ALBERT  R.  CRITTENDEN 


ANN  ARBOR.  MICHIGAN 
1911 


■t^"::. 


THE  SENTENCE  STRUCTURE 
OF  VIRGIL 


A  THESIS 
SUBMITTED  TO  THE  FACULTY  OF 

THE  DEPARTMENT  OF  LITERATURE.  SCIENCE 
AND  THE  ARTS 

OF 

THE  UNIVERSITY  OF  MICHIGAN 
FOR  THE  DEGREE  OF  DOCTOR  OF  PHILOSOPHY 


BY 

ALBERT  R.  CRITTENDEN 


ANN  ARBOR,  MICHIGAN 
1911 


PREFACE 

The  work  which  follows  is  based  upon  the  proposition  that 
since  language  is  the  result  of  psychological  forces, 
any  comprehensive  or  searching  study  of  its  phenom- 
ena must  rest  upon  psychological  principles  and  employ  psy- 
chological methods.  Functional  or  dynamic  methods  of  classi- 
fication have  accordingly  been  preferred.  To  the  possible  ob- 
jection that  such  a  classification  is  apt  to  be  fluctuating  and 
variable,  the  reply  must  be  made  that  the  phenomena  of  lan- 
guage are  fluctuating  and  variable,  and  a  true  method  of  in- 
vestigation must  conform  in  its  nature  to  the  nature  of  the 
subject-matter  to  be  investigated.  The  starting-point  of  the 
work  is  found  in  the  views  of  the  nature  of  discourse  set  forth 
by  the  newer  school  of  German  linguists,  more  particularly 
those  of  Professor  Wilhelm  Wundt,  regarding  the  nature  of  the 
sentence,  enunciated  in  his  Voelkerpsychologie.  As  the  litera- 
ture of  the  subject  is  not  yet  accessible  in  English,  it  has  seemed 
best  to  the  present  writer  to  state  the  fundamental  principles 
upon  which  the  paper  is  based  in  a  somewhat  detailed  intro- 
duction. For  most  of  the  facts  and  theories  stated  in  the  In- 
troduction, no  originality  is  claimed. 

In  his  own  work,  the  writer  seeks  first  to  determine  whether 
the  peculiar  character  of  an  author's  temperament  manifests 
itself  in  the  manner  in  which  his  thought  unfolds,  and  whether 
in  the  case  of  a  writer  of  strongly  marked  personal 
characteristics,  like  Virgil,  these  distinctive  traits  appear 
even  amid  the  exigencies  of  conventional  methods  of  expres- 
sion. In  the  case  of  writers  of  weak  literary  personality,  such 
as  some  of  the  later  epic  poets,  and  of  writers  whose  end  and 


223079 


aim  is  mechanical  imitation  of  the  forms  of  expression  of  some 
great  master,  such  personal  traits  may  be  difficult,  or  even  im- 
possible, to  trace. 

In  the  illustrative  passages  cited  from  various  authors, 
and  especially  in  those  cited  from  Virgil,  the  aim  has  been  to 
select  such  as  conform  to  the  author's  habitual  style,  rather 
than  those  which  illustrate  particular  points.  In  the  last  sec- 
tion of  the  paper,  the  endeavor  has  been  made  to  apply  the 
facts  discovered  with  respect  to  Virgil's  style  as  a  test  of  au- 
thorship in  the  case  of  the  most  important  of  the  minor  works 
which  have  been  at  various  times  ascribed  to  Virgil. 

The  writer  has  been  directly  indebted  to  bat  few  works 
in  the  development  of  this  investigation.  Acknowledgment  has 
been  made  to  these  in  footnotes  in  connection  with  the  por- 
tions of  the  work  concerned. 


CONTENTS 

Pagb 

I.  Introduction  -  -  -  -  -  11-22 

1.  Definition  of  the  Sentence                -             -  11 

2.  Nature  of  the  Thought  Processes  which  result 

in  Language          -             -             -             -  12 

3.  Historical   or    Genetic     Development    of    the 

Sentence          -             .             .             .  15 

4.  General  Types  of  Sentence  Structure  -             -  17 

{a)     The  apperceptive  type    -             -  17 

(6)     The  associative  type              -             -  20 

II.  Variations  in  Sentence  Structure  -         23-39 

1.  Relation  to  Literary  Form        -             -             -  23 

2.  Relation  to  Subject  Matter               .V          .  32 

3.  Relation  to  Temperament         -             -             -  37 

III.  Characteristics  of  Virgil's  Sentence  Struc- 

ture -  -  -  -  40-59 

1.  Predominance  of  Associative  Elements             -  40 

a     Types  of  Associative  Sentences           -  40 

( 1 )  The  Double  Sentence        -             -  40 
(a)     Its  Psychological  Function  41 

(2)  Longer  Associative  Series              -  43 

2.  Absence  of  Complex  Analysis         -             -  44 

a     Ascending  and  Descending  Structure  in 

Complex  Sentences        -             -  45 

(1)  Organization   of    Ascending  and 

Descending  Members             -  45 

(2)  Relation  of  Function  to  Position  -  45 

(a)     In  Virgil          -             -  45 

(d)     In  Prose  -             -             -  46 

(3)  Virgil's     Tendency    toward    De- 

scending Structure                -  46 

(4)  Difference  in  Psychological  Func- 
tion between  Ascending  and  De- 
scending Structure             -             -  47 


(5)     Relation  to  Other  Historical  Tenden- 
cies in  the  Latin  Lang^uage      -  49 

3.  Connectives  in  Virgil  -             -             -             -  50 

4.  Participial  Constructions     -             -             -  54 

5.  Effect    of    Emotional    Content   upon    Virgil's 

Sentence  Structure            -             -             -  54 

6.  Summary  of  Virgilian  Characteristics         -  56 

IV.  Sentence    Structure   of   Ovid  and  the   Epic 

Writers  of  the  First  Century  A.  D., 

COMPARED   WITH    ViRGIL  -  -  59-62 

1.  Ovid    -             -             -             -             -             -  59 

2.  Ivucan         -             -             -             -             -  60 

3.  The  Epic  Writers  of  the  Flavian  Period 

a.  Valerius  Flaccus         -             -             -  61 

b.  Silius  Italicus        .              .              -  61 

c.  Papinius  Statins           -             -             -  62 

V.  The    Authenticity    of    the    Minor    Works 

Ascribed   to  Virgil  -  -  63-72 

1.  The  Ciris         -             -             -             -             -  63 

2.  The  Culex              ....  69 

3.  The  Moretum               -             -             -             -  69 


BIBLIOGRAPHY 

A.     TEXTS  CITED. 

Incerti  Auctoris  De  Ratione  Dicendi  Ad  Gaium 

Herennium  Libri  IV,  Ed.  F.  Marx. 

Leipzig,    1894. 
D.    Magni  Ausonii  Opera  Omnia. 

Delphine  Edition,  Vol.  II,  London,  1823. 

C.    Julii  Caesaris  Belli  Galliei  Libri  VII 

A.  Hirtii  Liber  VIII,  Ed.  H.  Meusel,  Berlin,  1894. 

M.  TuUii  Ciceronis  Quae  Supersunt  Omnia. 
Ed.  J.  G.  Baiter,  C.  L.  Kayser. 
Vol.  IV,  Leipzig,  1861. 

Eunianae  Poesis  Reliquiae. 

Ed.  J.  Vahlen,  (2nd  edition)  Leipzig,  1903. 

Quinti  Horatii  Flaeei  Opera  Omnia. 

Ed.  A.  J.  Macleane,  (4th  edition)  London,  1881. 

M.  Annaei  Lucani  Pharsalia. 

Ed.  P.  Lemaire,  (2  vols.)  Paris,  1830. 
T.  Luereti  Cari  De  Rerum  Natura  Libri  Sex. 

Ed.  H.  A.  J.  Munro,  London,  1900. 
P.  Ovidius  Naso. 

(Ex  Rudolphi  Merkelii  Reeognitione) 
Ed.  R.  Ehwald,  Vol.  II,  Metamorphoses, 

Teubner,  Leipzig,  1897.   . 
Seriptorum  Rei  Rusticae. 

Tomus  I  (Cato :  De  Re  Rustica) ; 
Toraus  II  (Columella)  ;  Leipzig,  1794. 

L.  Annaei  Senecae  Opera  Quae  Supersunt. 

Ed.  F.  Haase,  Teubner,  Leipzig,  1881. 

L.  Annaei  Senecae  Tragoediae. 

Ed.  F.  Leo,    Berlin,  1878. 
Sili  Italici  Punica. 

Ed.  L.  Bauer    (2  vols.)    Teubner,  Leipzig,   1890. 

Thebais  P.  Papinii  Statii. 

Ed.  J.  A.  Amar  and  N.  E.  Lemaire, 

(2  vols.)  Paris,  1825. 

P.  Cornelii  Taciti  Opera  Quae  Supersunt. 

Ed.  J.  Mueller,  Leipzig  and  Vienna,  1902. 


C.  Valeri  Flacei  Setini  Balbi  Argonauticon. 

Ed.  A.  Baehrens,  Teubner,  Leipzig,   1875. 

P.  Vergili  Maronis  Opera. 

Ed.  0.  Ribbeck  (4  vols.)  Teubner,  Leipzig,  1894. 

GENERAL  WORKS  CONSULTED. 

Franz  Boaz :     Chinook  Texts. 

Pub.  U.  S.  Bureau  of  Ethnology, 

Government  Printing  Office,  Washington,  1894. 

E.  A.  Boucke :     Associative  and  Apperceptive   Types  of 
Sentence  Structure. 

Jour.  Germanic  Philology,  Vol.  IV,  p.  389. 

E.  A.  Boucke :     Goethes  AVeltanschauung.  Stuttgart,  1907. 

William  James :     Principles  of  Psychology. 

New  York,  1904. 

C.  L.  Meader :    T'ypes  of  Sentence  Structure  in  Latin  Prose 
Writers. 

Trans.  Am.  Phil.  Assoc.  VoL  XXXVI,  (1905)  p.  32. 

E.  P.  Morris:    On  Principles  and  Methods  in  Syntax. 

New  York,  1901. 

F.  N.  Scott :  The  Genesis  of  Speech ;  Pub.  Mod.  Lang.  Assoc. 

of  America,  Vol.  XXXIII,  p.  4. 

Herbert  Spencer :    First  Principles.  New  York,  1900, 

Henri  Weil:  De  L'Ordre  des  Mots  dans  les  Langages  Mo- 
dernes.  Paris,  1869. 

E.   Weissenborn :   Untersuchungen  ueber  den   Satz — 
und  Periodenbau  in  Virgi)  s  Aeneide.  1879. 

Wilhelm   Wundt :     Voelkerpsychologie. 

(2nd  ed.)  Leipzig,  1904. 


SENTENCE  STRUCTURE  IN  VIRGIL 


I.     INTRODUCTION. 

1.  DEFINITION  OF  THE  SENTENCE. 

Recent  years  have  brought  a  marked  change  in  the  attitude 
of  the  student  of  syntax  toward  the  facts  of  language,  and  a 
corresponding  change  in  the  descriptions  and  definitions  by 
which  these  facts  have  been  set  forth.  A  good  illustration  of  this 
changed  attitude  is  found  in  the  definition  of  the  sentence. 
Many  of  the  older  grammarians  were  accustomed  to  define  the 
sentence  as  a  combination  of  words  expressing  a  thought.  The 
words  were  thought  of  as  units,  and  the  emphasis  was  put  upon 
the  supposed  synthetic  nature  of  the  process;  i.  e.,  one  was  con- 
ceived to  put  words  together  to  build  up  the  fabric  of  a  sen- 
tence, somewhat  as  a  man  might  put  bricks  and  stones  together 
in  building  a  house.  This  conception  of  the  sentence  is  due  in 
part  to  certain  very  natural  but  superficial  analogies,  and  in 
part  to  the  fact  that  the  earlier  stages  of  any  science  are  very 
properly  occupied  for  the  most  part  with  the  statement  and 
classification  of  the  external  facts  of  that  science,  before  any 
deeper  investigation  of  the  forces  which  have  brought  about 
those  facts  is  possible.  The  earlier  method  of  treatment  might 
be  called  the  analytic  or  static  method ;  the  later,  the  functional 
or  dynamic  method.  With  the  increasing  prominence  of  the 
biological  sciences,  and  the  dominance  of  the  law  of  evolution, 
and  more  especially  with  the  great  attention  now  given  to  psy- 
chology and  psychological  methods  of  investigation,  our  defini- 
tion of  the  sentence  has  had  to  be  revised.  We  now  think  of 
the  sentence  as  the  linguistic  express'on  of  a  process  of  thought 
whereby  a  certain  thought-whole,  or  "unit  of  thought,"  more 
or  less  clearly  present  in  consciousness,  is  developed  or  "organ- 
ized" until  its  component  parts  with  their  different  functions, 
and  the  relations  existing  between  these  parts,  are  present  to 
consciousness.  The  parts  of  the  thought-whole  and  some  of  the 
relations  existing  between  them  are  represented  by  words.  The 
original  thought-whole  is  represented  by  the  sentence.  Per- 
haps the  best  formulation  of  this  view  'of  the  later  syntax  is 


12  Sentence  Structure  in  Virgil 

contained  in  Wundt's  definition  of  the  sentence.*  Such  a  con- 
ception of  the  sentence  affords  the  basis  of  a  new  method  of 
approach  to  many  linguistic  problems,  and  cannot  fail,  if  right- 
ly applied,  to  throw  much  light  upon  phenomena  of  language 
which  hitherto  have  been  but  very  partially  understood. 

2.  NATURE  OP  THE  THOUGHT  PROCESSES  WHICH  RESULT  IN 

LANGUAGE. 

Language  must  be  regarded  as  an  external  and  more  or 
less  inadequate  symbolism  or  means  of  expression  of  certain  in- 
ner processes  of  consciousness.  It  may  be  expected  then  to 
correspond,  in  the  broad  lines  of  its  development,  to  these  inner 
thought  processes,  but,  like  any  other  form  of  symbolism,  it 
will  be  inexact  in  some  respects.  The  general  nature  of 
thought  processes  has  been  well  described  by  Professor  James 
in  his  Principles  of  Psychology,  in  the  suggestive  chapter  on 
the  "Stream  of  Thought."  The  most  salient  characteristics  of 
the  thought  process,  as  there  described,  are  its  continuity  and 
its  constant  change.  Perhaps  a  concrete  illustration  may  make 
the  matter  clearer.  Suppose  a  camera  obscura  standing  upon 
the  bank  of  a  stream,  focused  upon  the  surface  of  the  water^ 
down  which  many  objects  of  various  sorts  are  floating.  There 
will  be  two  chief  factors  at  work  in  the  representations  pic- 
tured upon  the  screen:  first,  a  certain  number  of  objects  upon 
the  surface  of  the  stream  will  fall  within  the  field  of  the  lens 
at  any  given  moment,  and  so  will  be  represented  upon  the  screen 
in  certain  spatial  relations  to  each  other.  Of  these  objects, 
some  may  fall  nearer  the  center  of  the  field  of  the  lens,  and 
so  may  find  sharper  definition  upon  the  screen,  while  others, 
which  fall  near  the  outer  boundary  of  the  field  of  the  lens,  will 
be  less  clearly  represented,  but  all  are  within  the  field  of  the 
lens  at  the  same  time,  and  the  whole  group  is  represented  upon 
the  screen  at  once  as  a  result  of  a  combination  of  simultaneous 
processes.  On  the  other  hand,  the  contents  of  the  field  of  the  lens 
are  constantly  changing  with  the  progress  of  the  current.  Some 
objects,  which  have  been  occupying  the  center  of  the  field,  now 
pass  toward  the  circumference  and  are  less  and  less  clearly 
represented,  until  they  pass  wholly  without  the  field  and  are 

♦Wiiiidt:  Voelkerpsyphologie  Vol.  I,  Die  Sprache,  Part  II;  p.  239  follow- 
ing:, especially  p.  245,  (second  edition).  "Hlernach  koennen  wir  den  Satz  nach 
selnen  objektlven  wie  subjecktlven  merkmalen  deflnieren  als  den  sprachlichen 
.\nsdruck  fner  die  willknerliche  Gliedening  einer  Gesamtvorstellung  in  Ihre  in 
logl.sche  Beziehungen  zueinander  getsetzten  Bestandteile." 


Sentence  Structure  in  Virgil  13 

succeeded  by  others  which  are  now  just  entering  the  field. 
These  are  more  and  more  clearly  represented  until  they  pass  the 
center  of  the  field.  Others  never  reach  the  center  of  the  field, 
but  pass  through  it  near  its  outer  boundary,  and  consequently 
receive  only  a  dim  representation  on  the  screen.  We  have  thus 
a  series  of  successive  pictures, — or  rather  a  continually  chang- 
ing picture, — which  is  the  result  of  both  simultaneous  and  suc- 
cessive factors. 

Now  language  results  from  a  somewhat  similar  process  or 
combination  of  processes.  There  is  a  sort  of  field  of  conscious- 
ness; those  objects  which  lie  near  its  circumference — in  the 
"fringe  of  consciousness,"  as  Professor  James  puts  it — are 
dimly  present  to  the  mind's  eye,  while  those  which  are  in  the 
focus  of  attention  are  most  sharply  apprehended.  The  sen- 
tence, as  the  unit  of  discourse,  is  the  representation  of  what 
lies  within  the  field  of  thought  at  a  given  moment.  The  focus 
of  consciousness  may  be  occupied  successively  by  one  and  an- 
other element  of  the  group,  but  the  whole  group  is  present  in 
consciousness  at  the  same  time,  and  its  elements  are  appre- 
hended in  their  relations  to  one  another  and  to  the  whole.  The 
degree  of  complexity  to  which  the  sentence  may  attain  is  de- 
termined by  the  number  of  elements  which  the  mind  's  able  to 
apprehend  in  their  relations  at  one  and  the  same  time.  Few 
persons  can  read  Kant  without  the  most  strenuous  exercise  of 
the  voluntary  attention,  for  the  simple  reason  that  Kant's  ex- 
cessively long  and  complex  sentences  involve  more  elements 
and  more  relations  than  the  average  mind  can  grasp  at  once. 
This  capacity  of  the  individual  mind,  of  course,  varies  greatly 
with  experience  and  education.  The  language  of  primitive 
men  and  the  natural  language  of  children  consist  chiefly  of  sim- 
ple sentences,  but  the  average  adult  in  cultured  communities 
is  prone  to  speak — and  still  more  to  write — in  complex  sen- 
tences which  would  mean  little  or  nothing  to  the  child  or  the 
savage. 

But  we  have  thus  far  considered  only  the  simultaneous  fac- 
tors m  the  mental  process.  To  account  for  the  single  sentence, 
however,  is  not  to  account  for  the  whole  of  discourse,  and  not 
all  the  phenomena  even  of  some  single  sentences  can  be  account- 
ed for  by  simultaneous  factors  alone.  The  contents  of  the 
field  of  consciousness,  like  those  of  the  field  of  the  camera,  are 
constantly  changing.  It  is  this  quality  of  flux  which  finds  ex- 
pression in  the  term  "stream  of  thought,"  or  the  more  common 


f 

14  Sentence  Structure  in  Virgil 

one,  "a  train  of  thought."  Both  terms  imply  continuity.  It  is. 
therefore  impossible  to  draw  any  line  of  demarcation  between 
those  elements  of  conscious  experience  which  find  expression  in 
one  sentence  and  those  which  find  expression  in  another.  Even 
in  spoken  or  written  discourse,  where  of  necessity  the  tendency 
to  isolation  is  more  marked  than  in  the  original  which  they 
represent,  it  is  often  difficult  and  sometimes  impossible  to  de- 
termine where  one  sentence  leaves  off  and  the  next  one  begins. 
Subtle  impulses  of  association  are  forever  leading  the  mind 
from  one  bit  of  psychic  experience  to  another, — associations 
which  now  appeal  to  the  voluntary  attention  and  now  exercise 
their  power  below  the  threshold  of  consciousness.  Sometimes 
these  associations  are  so  strongly  felt  that  they  find  expression 
in  discourse  in  "connecting  words,"  sometimes  they  are  unex- 
pressed, but  whether  expressed  or  not  we  may  be  sure  that  the 
thought  process  which  lies  behind  speech  is  uninterrupted. 
We  may  now  supplement  our  illustration  of  the  camera  obscura 
by  adding  an  operator,  who  focuses  the  instrument  now  upon 
this  group  of  floating  objects,  now  upon  that.  We  have  now 
successive  factors  of  several  different  kinds  entering  into  the 
formation  of  our  changing  picture.  Of  these,  the  will  of  the 
operator  corresponds  to  the  voluntary  attention  in  the  thought 
process,  the  surface  currents,  winds,  etc.,  to  the  factors  which 
appeal  to  the  involuntary  attention,  and  the  various  impulses 
which  come  from  the  invisible  depths  below  are  analogous  to 
those  mysterious  but  powerful  forces  in  the  soul  which  operate 
below  the  threshold  of  consciousness  or  are  derived  from  the 
forgotten  past.  In  a  certain  very  real  sense,  every  sentence 
is  influenced  by  the  content  and  the  form  of  all  the  sentences 
that  have  preceded  it.  In  the  course  then  of  those  processes 
which  result  in  speech,  the  mind  is  busied  with  two  sorts  of 
activities :  first,  it  endeavors  to  develop  the  thought  whole 
which  is  present  before  it  at  any  given  instant,  to  differentiate 
its  parts  and  set  them  in  their  proper  relation  to  one  another^ 
and  second,  it  moves  forward  from  one  thought-whole  to  an- 
other, under  the  influence  of  various  forces  of  association. 
There  is  continual  interplay  of  analytic  and  synthetic  activi- 
ties. Relatively  speaking,  however,  the  exercise  of  the  analytic 
function  implies  a  pause,  or  at  least  a  slackening,  in  the  for- 
ward movement  of  the  thought.  To  use  a  bold  aqd  possibly  not 
altogether  accurate  metaphor,  in  analytic  thojv^^j^t  we  busy 
ourselves  with  a  vertical  cross-section  of  the  streari?    f  conscious 


Sentence  Structure  in  Virgil  15 

experience,  while  associative  thought  corresponds  to  the  on- 
ward flow  of  the  current. 

3.     THE  HISTORICAL  OR  GENETIC  DEVELOPMENT  OF  THE  SEN- 
TENCE. 

Many  indications  point  to  the  conclusion  that  the  earliest 
form  of  language  developed  by  the  race  was  the  immediate  re- 
flex of  those  stimuli  which  appeal  directly  to  the  feelings.  In 
all  probability,  the  cry  of  pain,  the  shout  of  triumph,  the  ex- 
clamation of  surprise,  etc.,  or  as  a  recent  writer*  has  suggested, 
variation  in  respiration  corresponding  to  the  comfort  or  dis- 
comfort of  the  subject,  constituted  the  first  language  of  primi- 
tive man.  Such  an  utterance  was  a  sentence  in  embryo— ^the 
expression  of  a  thought-whole,  vaguely  but  strongly  felt.  The 
next  step  was  probably  the  development  of  this  thought,  and 
consequently  of  its  expression,  into  component  parts  with  dif- 
ferent functions  or  relations,  perhaps,  for  example,  into  a  sub- 
ject and  predicate.  This  created  the  demand  for  a  subordinate 
unit  of  expression,  the  word.  Sentences,  then,  were  not  formed 
in  the  beginning  by  putting  words  together,  but  words  were 
developed  from  the  earlier  vaguely  expressed  sentences. 

The  second  stage  then  in  the  evolution  of  speech  is  that 
in  which  language  consists  of  short,  simple,  co-ordinate  sen- 
tences, following  one  another  without  connectives,**  The  rela- 
tions between  successive  units  of  thought  are  often  more  or 
less  clearly  felt,  but  as  yet  no  verbal  means  for  their  expres- 
sion have  been  developed.  They  are  suggested,,  rather  than 
expressed,  by  contiguity  in  time  of  utterance,  intonation,  in- 
flection, etc.  Even  in  comparatively  high  stages  of  civilization, 
the  language  of  common  conversation  still  conforms  to  a  con- 
siderable extent  to  this  type.*  Interesting  reminiscences  of  it 
are  found  in  the  rough,  crude  style  of  the  didactic  writings  of 
Cato  the  Censor,  the  "Father  of  Latin  Prose."  A  person  speak- 
ing under  the  influence  of  strong  emotion  often  relapses  into 
this  more  primitive  form  of  speech.  Artistic  representations  of 
this  phenomenon  aire  frequent  in  the  passionate  outbursts  of 
the  heroine  of  Seneca's  Medea  and  in  many  other  dramatic 

*  Prof.  F.  N.  Scott.  In  an  article  entitled  "The  Genesis  of  Speech."  Pub. 
Mod.   Langr    Assoc,  of  .America.     Vol.  XX II I,   p.  4 

**  Examples  f  most  of  these  early  stages  in  the  development  of  sentence 
structure  may  )•  found  In  Franz  Boaz:  Chinook  Texts,  p.  9  fif.,  and  in  similar 
works  publish  y  the  U.  S.  Bureau  of  Ethnology. 

♦  Compai  lie  chapter  on  Parataxis,  in  Morris:  On  Principles  and  Meth- 
ods in  Synta 


16  Sentence  Structure  in  Virgil 

productions,  in  Lucan's  Pharsalia,  VI,  150-165,  and  230-235, 
and  in  the  speeches  of  Dido  in  the  fourth  book  of  the  Aeneid. 
In  such  cases,  the  speaker  or  writer  surrenders  his  conventional 
forms  of  utterance  and  allows  himself  to  be  dominated  by  his 
material.  His  reactions  are  instinctive,  rather  than  rational. 
The  same  thing  often  occurs  in  rapid,  animated  narrative,  or  in 
detailed  description,  where  the  psychological  order  is  followed 
and  the  short,  sharp  sentences  follow  each  other  like  the  swift 
strokes  of  an  artist's  brush,  as  he  strives  to  place  upon  canvas 
the  fleeting  image  which  has  taken  possession  of  his  soul.  In- 
stances have  been  cited*  from  Tacitus'  Agricola,  xxxviii,  1-13, 
and  Histories  ii,  15.  Others  are  found  in  the  Germania,  vi, 
xxii-xv,  in  the  Aeneid  II,  310-315;  IV,  665-668;  and  in  the 
description  of  the  shield  of  Aeneas,  in  the  last  one  hundred 
lines  of  Book  VIII.  In  the  case  of  a  few  writers,  the  tendency 
to  this  isolating  type  of  sentence  structure  becomes  so  strong 
as  to  be  a  distinctive  characteristic,  as  with  Seneca,  e.  g.,  De 
Ben.  VI,  iii;  Ep.  Ill,  iii  (24),  17-21;  Ep.  IV,  xii,  (41),  1-4,  and 
with  Emerson,  e.  g.,  in  the  earlier  paragraphs  of  the  Essay  on 
Friendship. 

The  third  stage  in  the  evolution  of  sentence  structure  is 
that  in  which  the  successive  sentences  are  loosely  joined  by  a  few 
stock  connecting  words,  of  which  some  rather  vaguely  indicate 
the  general  relation  existing  between  the  sentences,  and  some 
merely  mark  the  beginning  of  a  new  sentence,  and  perhaps 
emphasize  what  is  to  follow.  The  Homeric  poems  are  a  good 
illustration  of  this  type.  The  connectives  are  very  frequently 
used,  but  are  few  in  number  and  limited  in  range  of  meaning. 
The  most  frequent  are  kul  and  re  ,  which  are  merely  linking 
or  cumulative  and  apa  and  7e  which  are  of  an  asseverative 
or  interjectional  nature.  It  should  be  remarked  that  throusrhout 
these  earlier  periods  in  its  development,  language  is  concrete  in 
its  nature;  it  deals  with  the  objective  world  and  the  feelings 
and  emotions  of  man,  as  expressed  in  his  actions.  With  the 
growth  of  civilization,  and  the  widening  of  human  experience, 
the  thoughts  of  men  come  to  be  occupied  more  than  formerly 
with  relations  between  things, — the  age  of  abstract  thought 
has  begun.  Corresponding  to  this  expansion  of  thought  is  the 
development  of  the  relating  or  connecting  words  in  language. 
They  increase  in  number  and  become  more  definite  and  precise 
in  meaning,  and  a  more  varied  and  elaborate  sentence  structure 

*  By  Professor  Meader  in  the  article  referred  to  on  page  17. 


Sentence  Stkucture  in  Virgil  17 

results.  A  comparison  of  the  Argonautica  of  Apollonius  Rho- 
dius  with  the  Odyssey  of  Homer  will  quickly  make  this  evi- 
•dent. 

But  in  the  meantime  a  differentiation  in  function  gradually 
sprang  up  in  the  use  of  connectives.  Certain  types  of  sentences 
came  to  be  felt  as  subordinate  to  those  to  which  they  were  at- 
tached, and  in  the  same  way  certain  connectives  came  to  be  re- 
garded as  subordinating  connectives.  But  the  dividing  line 
between  co-ordinate  and  subordinate  sentences  is  nowhere  hard 
and  fast,  nor  is  it  possible  to  say,  in  any  given  case,  just  when 
the  connective  ceased  to  be  a  co-ordinating  connective  and  be- 
came a  subordinating  one.  In  fact,  it  is  becoming  increasingly 
clear  that  nowhere  in  the  treatment  of  the  phenomena  of  lan- 
guage can  sharp  lines  of  demarcation  or  classification  be  drawn. 
Speaking  in  general  terms,  however,  the  so-called  complex  sen- 
tence, in  which  one  or  more  subordinate  sentences  are  depend- 
ent upon  a  single  independent  sentence,  is  both  the  product  and 
the  chosen  instrument  of  abstract  thought.  Roughly  speaking, 
it  is  the  characteristic  type  of  sentence  structure  in  the  Age  of 
Prose.  It  should  be  borne  in  mind  in  this  connection  that  we 
are  now  speaking  of  the  historic  or  genetic  development  of  the 
complex  sentence.  The  manner  of  its  origin  in  the  individual 
mind  is  an  entirely  different  matter,  and  has  already  been  de- 
scribed. 

4.  GENERAL  TYPES  OF  SENTENCE  STRUCTURE. 

Two  principal  types  of  sentence  structure  are  of  frequent 
occurrence  in  the  more  highly  developed  languages  of  the  Indo- 
European  group.* 

* 

a.  The  apperceptive  type — that  characterized  by  complex 
analysis,  in  which  one  or  more  subordinate  sentences  depend 
upon  one  principal  sentence.  Several  degrees  of  subordination 
may  occur,  i.  e.,  a  sentence  which  depends  upon  the  principal 
sentence  may  in  turn  have  a  sentence  of  the  second  degree  de- 


*  The  chief  characteristics  of  these  two  types  have  been  described  by 
Wiiiidt:  Voelkerpsychologle,  1.  2.  p.  230  ff.  Several  sub-varieties  have  been 
described  by  Dr.  E.  A.  Boucke,  in  an  article  entitled  "Associative  and  Apper- 
ceptive Types  of  Sentence  Structure."  in  the  Journal  of  Germanic  Philology, 
Vol.  IV.  No.  4,  (1902),  and  several  additional  ones  by  Dr.  C.  L.  Meader,  in  an 
article  entitled  "Types  of  Sentence  Structure  in  Latin  Prose  Writers,"  in  the 
Transactions  of  the  American   Philological  Association,  Vol.  XXXVI,   1905. 


18  Sentence  Structure  in  VirgiIv 

pending  upon  it,  while  a  sentence  of  the  third  degree  may  de- 
pend upon  that  of  the  second  degree,  etc.  A  complex  sentence 
in  which  the  subordinate  sentences  precede  the  principal  sen- 
tence is  said  to  have  the  ascending  structure,  while  one  in  which 
the  subordinate  sentences  follow  the  principal  sentence  is  said  to 
manifest  descending  structure.  As  a  rule,  but  one  degree  of  sub- 
ordination occurs  in  ascending  structure,  although  a  second  de- 
gree occurs  occasionally,  and  very  rarely  a  third  degree.  In 
the  descending  structure,  on  the  other  hand,  the  third  and  even 
the  fourth  degree  are  not  uncommon.  The  absence  of  a  high 
degree  of  analysis  in  the  ascending  structure  is  probably  due  to- 
the  fact  that  the  strain  of  suspense  incurred  by  such  an  arrange- 
ment would  be  intolerable.  A  complex  sentence  in  which  the 
subordinate  member  is  included  within  the  parts  of  the  princi- 
pal member,  or  in  which  the  principal  member  is  included  with- 
in the  parts  of  the  subordinate  member,  or  in  which  the  parts- 
of  the  two  members  are  interwoven,  may  be  said  to  possess  in- 
termediate structure. 

Three  illustrative  sentences  of  the  apperceptive  type  are 
given  below,  the  first  having  ascending  structure,  the  second 
descending,  and  the  third  intermediate.  The  movement  of 
thought  in  each  of  these  sentences  is  represented  by  the  ac- 
companying formula,  in  which  "a"  represents  the  subject,  "b" 
the  predicate,  and  the  curved  line  joining  them  what  Wundt 
calls  the  binary  or  closed  nature  of  the  connection  between 
them.*  Capital  letters  are  used  to  indicate  the  principal  mem- 
ber in  a  complex  sentence  with  ascending  structure,  while  the 
lower-case  letters  represent  the  subordinate  members  of  such 
a  sentence.  In  the  descending  structure,  subordination  is  indi- 
cated by  writing  the  subordinate  member  below  the  principal 
member.  The  diagram  used  for  the  third  sentence  is  self-ex- 
planatory, but  it  should  perhaps  be  noted  that  in  the  subse-- 
quent  use  of  this  formula  in  this  work,  no  discrimination  is 
made  between  the  three  cases  of  intermediate  structure  men- 
tioned above  Where  no  relation  is  expressed  between- 
two  co-ordinate  members  which  have  the  same  function,  the 
fact  is  indicated  by  a  perpendicular  line.  Where  two  elements 
belonging  to  the  same  category  are  joined  by  a  purely  asso- 

*  The  essential  features  of  this  system  of  graphic  representation  are  used 
V)y  Wundt:  Voellierpsychologie,  I.  2,  p.  316  ff. ;  the  system  is  further  elabor- 
ated in  the  articles  by  Dr.  Boucke  and  Dr.  Meader  already  referred  to,  and  by 
the  present  writer. 


Sentence  Structure  in  Virgil  19 

ciative  connection,  the  second  is  distinguished  by  a  subscript 
figure. 

si  nulla  accendit  tantarum  gloria  rerum 
nee  super  ipse  sua  molitur  laude  laborem, 
Ascanione  pater  Romanas  invidet  arces? 

Aen.  IV.,  232-234. 


a  b         ai  bi         A  B 

illud  ab  hoc  igitur  quaerendum  est,  quid  sit  aniari 
tanto  opere,  ad  somnum  si  res  redit  atque  quietem, 
cur  quisquam  aeterno  possit  tabescere  luctu. 

Lucretius:     De  Rerum  Natura, 

III.,  909-911. 


tu,  cuius  et  annis 
et  generi   fata  indulgent,  quern  numina  poscunt, 
Ingredere,  O  Teucrum  atque  Italum  fortissime  ductor. 

Aen.  VIII.,  511-513. 


The  formulae  represent  only  the  major  elements  of  the 
sentence,  i.  e.,  subject  and  predicate,  independent  and  subor- 
dinate clauses.  The  neglect  of  the  minor  elements,  e.  g., 
participial,  adjective  and  adverbial  constructions,  substantives 
in  apposition,  etc.,  assists  the  eye  in  following  the  main  frame- 
work of  the  sentence,  which  corresponds  in  general  to  the 
movement  of  thought. 

In  all  the  three  sentences  cited,  the  movement  of  thought 
results  from  simultaneous  factors  only;  each  of  the  elaborated 
sentences  consists  only  of  the  analysis,  or  better  perhaps,  of 
the  development,  of  a  single  unit  of  thought.  There  is  no  for- 
ward movement  from  one  unit  of  thought  to  another.  The 
development  or  analysis  is  the  work  of  the  voluntary  attention. 
This  is  why  such  sentences  are  called  apperceptive  sentences. 
Sentences  of  this  type  are  a  natural  means  of  expression 
of  abstract  thought.  They  are  therefore  more  common  in  prose 
than  in  poetry,  and  within  the  domain  of  prose  are  found  more 
frequently  in  works  which  deal  with  subjects  calling  for  much 
logical  analysis.  Scientific  exposition  is  particularly  prone  to 
be  couched  in  language    which  conforms  more  or  less  closely 


20  Sentence  Structure  in  Virgil 

to  this  general  type  of  sentence  structure.  Such  literature 
deals  largely  with  relational  elements.  A  style  characterized 
by  a  high  degree  of  complexity  is  apt  to  be  difficult  for  most 
readers  to  follow,  as  it  makes  heavy  demands  upon  the  volun- 
tary attention,  in  order  to  grasp  and  hold  in  mind  the  relations 
of  the  various  elements  of  the  sentence. 

b.  The  second  of  the  two  principal  types  of  sentence 
structure  is  the  associative  type,  which  is  characterized  by 
successive  linking  or  juxtaposition  of  simple,  co-ordinate  sen- 
tences. This  linking  takes  place  under  the  influence  of  forces 
of  association,  which  sometimes  operate  consciously  and  some- 
times unconsciously.  The  utterance  of  some  element  in  one 
sentence  calls  into  mind  a  new  unit  of  thought  which  has  been 
in  some  way  and  at  some  time  associated  with  it  and  thus  makes 
the  transition  from  one  sentence  to  another  co-ordinate  with 
it.  The  movement  of  thought,  aside  from  the  analysis  of  each 
unit  of  thought,  is  forward  from  one  unit  of  thought  to  anoth- 
er, i.  e.,  it  results  not  only  from  simultaneous  factors,  but  from 
successive  factors  as  well. 

The  three  following  sentences  illustrate  this  form  of 
sentence  structure.  In  the  accompanying  formulae,  the  associ- 
ative linking  is  represented  by  a  horizontal  line  connecting  the 
successive  units  of  thought. 

panditur  extemplo  foribus  domus  atra  revolsis, 
abstractaeque  boves  abiurataeque  rapinae 
caelo  ostenduntur,  pedibusque  informe  cadaver 
protrahitur. 

Aen,  VIII,  262-265. 


a        b  ai        a-j        bi  as      bs 

Cases  in  which  several  sentences  have  a  common  member  may 

be  represented  as  follows  : 

Ille  ruenti 
aggere  consistit,  primumque  cadavera  plenis 
turribus  evolvit,  subeuntesque  obruit  hostes 
corporibus;   totaeque  viro  dant  tela  ruinae, 
roboraque,  et  moles;  host!  seque  ipse  minatur. 

Lucan:     Pharsalia,  VI,  169-173. 

a        b        bi         ba         as  bs  a  bi 

There  is  a  wide  range  of  meaning  in  the  connectives  used 
to  join  successive  units  of  thought  in  this  form  of  sentence 
structure.  Words  like  ef  and  gtie  have  simnlv  a  Hnkine  or 
cumulative  force ;  they  express  simple  addition.    But  in  addi- 


Sentence  Structure  in  Virgil  21 

tion  to  this  use,  the  connective  may  express  many  other  rela- 
tions, such  as  time,  cause,  consequence,  adversative  relations, 
etc.  Connectives  with  such  a  double  function  may  be  repre- 
sented by  the  horizontal  square  bracket,  as  in  the  illustrations 
below.  Sometimes  the  relation  expressed  by  the  connective  is  a 
loose,  general  one ;  sometimes  it  is  relatively  clear  and  precise. 
Sentences  of  this  type  in  which  the  relation  is  exact  form  the 
stage  of  transition  for  the  historical  development  of  the  com- 
plex sentence. 

illi  agmine  certo 
Laocoonta  petunt:   et  primum  parva  duorum 
corpora  natorum  serpens  amplexus  uterque 
implicat  et  miseros  morsu  depascitur  artus; 
post  ipsum  auxilio  subeuntem  ac  tela  ferentem 
corripiunt  spirisque  ligant  ingentibus,  et  iam 
bis  medium  amplexi,  bis  coUo  squamea  circum 
terga  dati  superant  capite  et  cervicibus  altis. 

Aen.  II.  212-219. 


Generally  speaking,  the  associative  type  of  sentence  struc- 
ture is  characteristic  of  literature  in  which  the  feelings  and 
emotions  find  fuller  expression.  It  is  the  medium  for  subjec- 
tive expression.  The  will  plays  a  smaller  part  in  the  direction 
of  the  thought,  which  is  guided  chiefly  by  various  forces  of 
association.  Some  of  these  may  even  exercise  their  influence 
without  the  knowledge  of  the  speaker.  From  the  point  of  view 
of  the  reader,  such  literature  is  apt  to  be  easier  to  follow,  as 
it  proceeds  in  the  natural  order  of  passive  attention.  This  is 
a  more  primitive  order  of  thought  and  expression,  and  is  apt 
to  be  found  in  the  language  of  children  and  of  primitive  men. 

Closely  connected  with  the  associative  type  is  the  form 
of  discourse  described  on  pages  15  and  16,  in  which  a  number 
of  short  simple  sentences  are  felt  as  parts  of  one  related  whole, 
but  in  which  the  relations  between  these  sentences  are  not 
verbally  expressed.  From  the  rhetorical  point  of  view,  this 
form  of  expression  not  only  adds  vivacity  and  a  pleasing 
variety,  but  allows  the  attention  to  be  concentrated  upon  the 
content  of  the  sentences  rather  than  upon  the  relations  between 
them,  or  perhaps  adds  interest  by  leaving  something  to  the 
imagination  of  the  reader  or  hearer. 


22  Sentence  Structure  in  Virgil 

Relatirely  few  sentences  in  connected  discourse  conform 
strictly  and  solely  to  any  one  of  the  types  just  enunciated.  A 
much  greater  number  involve  both  apperceptive  and  associative 
elements,  as  in  the  following  typical  examples : 

Ac  dum  prima  novis  adolescit  frondibus  aetas, 
parcendum  teneris,  et  dum  se  laetus  ad  auras 
palmes  agit  laxis  per  purum  immissus  liabenis, 
ipsa  acie  nondum  falcis  temptanda,  sed  uncis 
carpendae  manibus  frondes  interque  legendae. 

Georgics  II,  362-366. 


munus  est  Orpheus  meum, 
qui  saxa  cantu  mulcet  et  silvas  trahit, 
geminique  munus  Castor  et  Pollux  meum  est 
satique  Borea  quique  trans  Pontum  quoque 
summota  Lynceus  lumine  immisso  videt, 
omnesque  Minyae:  nam  ducem  taceo  ducum, 
pro  quo  nihil  debetur:  hunc  nulli  imputo; 
vobis  revexi  ceteros,  unum  mihi. 

Seneca:  Medea,  228-235. 


The  following  sentence  contains  both  apperceptive  ele- 
ments and  associative  additions,  and  ascending,  descending, 
and  intermediate  structure. 

et  si  iam  nostro  sentit  de  corpore  postquam 
distractast  animi  natura  animaeque  potestas, 
nil  tamen  est  ad  nos  qui  comptu  coniugioque 
corporis  atque  animae  consistimus  uniter  apti. 
iiec,  si  materiem  nostram  collegerit  aetas 
post  obitum  rursumque  redegerit  ut  sita  nunc  est 
atque  iterum  nobis  fuerint  data  lumina  vitae, 
pertineat  quicquam  tamen  ad  nos  id  quoque  factum, 
interrupta  semel  cuni  sit  repetentia  nostri. 

Lucretius:     De  Rerum  Natura,  III.,  843-851. 


11.    VARIATIONS  IN  SENTENCE  STRUCTURE. 

The  distinction  between  apperceptive  and  associative 
"types  is  the  most  fundamental  and  significant  distinction  to 
be  made  in  the  study  of  sentence  structure.  Some  writers 
«how  ti  habitual  preference  for  a  complex  structure,  while 
others  manifest  an  equal  predilection  for  small  units  and 
associative  linking.  But  there  are  numerous  other  characteris- 
tics which  serve  to  distinguish  the  sentence  structure  of  one 
writer  or  of  one  work  from  those  of  other  writers  or  of  other 
works.  Several  of  these  will  be  brought  out  in  our  more  detailed 
investigation  of  Virgil's  style.  Are  such  peculiarities  of  sen- 
tence formation  due  to  the  personality  of  the  writer,  to  the 
nature  of  his  subject  matter,  to  the  particular  literary  form 
selected  as  the  medium  of  expression,  or  to  still  other  factors  ? 
We  have  seen  that  the  sentence  structure  of  a  particular  work 
may  depend  to  a  certain  extent  upon  the  degree  of  development 
of  the  language  in  the  period  in  which  its  composition  chances 
to  fall.  This  consideration  should  be  kept  in  mind  when  com- 
paring works  which  are  widely  separated  in  time,  or  works  in 
different  languages  of  disparate  development.  But  in  com- 
paring works  of  approximately  the  same  time,  in  the  same 
dialect,  this  factor  is  relatively  unimportant. 

I.     RELATION  TO  LITERARY  FORM. 

A  comparison  of  the  sentence  structure  of  the  Aeneid  with 
that  of  the  De  Rerum  Natura  of  Lucretius  shows  conclusively 
that  the  structure  may  vary  widely  within  the  limits  of  the 
same  literary  form.  Here  are  two  great  poems,  scarcely  a 
single  generation  apart  in  time,  and  both  couched  in  the  epic 
form,  the  dactylic  hexameter.  Yet  one  is  prevailingly  apper- 
ceptive in  its  sentence  structure,  while  in  the  other  the  associ- 
ative type  is  equally  predominant.  The  following  are  selected 
as  typical  passages  from  each  poem  :* 

hue  accedit  uti  sine  certis  imbribus  anni 
laetificos  nequeat  fetus  submittere  tellus 
nee  porro  secreta  cibo  natura  animantum 


•  The  conclusions  stated  in  this  work  are  based  upon  minute  examination 
of  extended  portions  of  the  texts  mentioned.  The  selections  here  graphically 
represented  are  merely  illustrative. 


24  Sentence  Structure  in  Virgil 

195  propagare  genus  posmt  vitamque  tueri; 

ut  potius  multis  communia  corpora  rebus 

niulta  putes  esse,  ut  verbis  elementa  videmus, 

quam  sine  principiis  ullam  rem  existere  posse. 

denique  cur  homines  tantos  natura  parare 
200  non  potuit,  pedibus  qui  pontum  per  vada  possent 

transire  et  magnos  manibus  divellere  montls 

multaque  vivendo  vitalia  vincere  saecla, 

si  non,  materies  quia  rebus  reddita  certast 

gignundis  e  qua  constat  quid  possit  oriri? 
205  nil  igitur  fieri  de  nilo  posse  fatendumst, 

semine  quando  opus  est  rebus  quo  quaeque  creatae 

aeris  in  teneras  possint  proferrier  auras. 

postremo  quoniam  incultis  praestare  videmus 

culta  loca  et  manibus  melioris  reddere  fetus, 
210  esse  videlicet  in  terris  primordia  rerum 

terraique  solum  subigentes  cimus  ad  ortus. 

quae  nos  fecundas  vertentes  vomere    glebas 

quod  si  nulla  forent,  nostro  sine  quaeque  labore 

sponte  sua  multo  fieri  meliora  videres. 

Lucretius:    I.,  192-214. 


192 


(a) 


c  d         ci        di       da 


199 


205 


208 


SENTENCE  Structure  in  Virgil  25 

The  passage  is  one  which,  like  most  of  the  work,  involves 
abstract  reasoning.  The  high  degree  of  complexity  is  notice- 
able. The  descending  structure  of  the  first  two  sentences 
would  also  attract  attention,  but  is  offset  by  the  ascending 
structure  in  the  last  two  sentences. 

Vix  ea  fatus  erat  senior,  subitoque  fragore 

intonuit  laevom,  et  de  caelo  lapsa  per  umbras 

Stella  facem  ducens  multa  cum  luce  cucurrit. 
695  illam,  summa  super  labantem  culmina  lecti, 

cernimus  Idaea  claram  se  condere  silva 

signantemque  vias;  tum  longo  limite  sulcus 

dat  lucem,  et  late  circum  loca  sulpure  fumant. 

hlc  vero  victus  genitor  se  toUere  ad  auras, 
700  adfaturque  deos  et  sanctum  sidus  adorat: 

'lam  lam  nulla  morast;  sequor  et  qua  ducitis  adsum. 

di  patrii,  servate  domum,  servate  nepotem. 

vestrum  hoc  augurium,  vestroque  in  numine  Troiast. 

eedo  equidem  nee,  nate,  tibi  comes  ire  recuse' 

Aen.  II..  692-704. 


692 


695 


bi       a2       ba 


bi 


°^^  a  b  bi  b- 


701 


702 


704 


a         b     1      a         b         a  b  A        B 


(a)      b     I     a        b         ai       bi 


The  simplicity  of  the  sentence  structure  in  this  typical 
passage  from  the  Aeneid  is  apparent  at  once.  There  is  very 
little  analysis,  and  a  marked  predominance  of  associative  con- 
nections. It  stands  in  the  strongest  contrast  to  the  passage 
just  quoted  from  Lucretius. 

hinc  indignatur  se  mortalem  esse  creatum 
885    nee  videt  in  vera  nullum  fore  niorte  alioni  se 
qui  possit  vivus  sibi  se  lugere  peremptum 
stansque  iacentem  se  lacerari  urive  dolere. 
nam  si  in  morte  malumst  mails  morsuque  ferarum 
tractari,  non  invenio  qui  non  sit  acerbum 


26  Sentence  Structure  in  Virgil 

890  ignibus  impositum  calidis  torrescere  flammis 

aut  in  melle  situm  suffocari  atque  rigere 

frigore,  cum  summo  gelidi  cubat  aequore  saxi, 

urgerive  superne  obtritum  pondere  terrae. 

lara  iam  non  domus  accipiet  te  laeta,  neque  uxor 
895  optima  nee  dulces  occurrent  oscula  nati 

praeripere  et  tacita  pectus  dulcedine  tangent. 

non  poteris  factis  florentibus  esse,  tuisque 

praesidium.    misero  misere'  aiunt  'omnia  ademit 

una  dies  infesta  tibi  tot  praemia  vitae.' 
900  illud  in  his  rebus  non  addunt  'nee  tibi  earum 

iam  desiderium  rerum  super  insidet  una.' 

quod  bene  si  videant  animo  dictisque  sequantur, 

dissoluant  animi  magno  se  angore  metuque. 

'tu  quidem  ut  es  leto  sopitus,  sic  eris  aevi 
905  quod  superest  cunctis  privatu'  doloribus  aegris: 

at  nos  horrifleo  cinefaetum  te  prope  busto 

insatiabiliter  deflevimus,  aeternumque 

nulla  dies  nobis  maerorem  e  peetore  demet.'  * 

Lucretius:     De  Rerum  Natura,  III,  884-908. 

884  


e         f       (e)    e  f       f i '        f 


888 


a        b        AH 


894 


897 


900 


•904 


a         b  a       a  b       b 


a         b        bi     I     a         (a         b):    b 


d, 


The  passage  from  line  894  to  line  908  inclusive  is  poetic  in 
the  highest  degree  and  is  full  of  remarkably  deep  feeling.  The 
change  from  the  complex  structure  of  the  first  two  sentences  to 

*  The  next  three  lines  have  already  been  quoted  on  pagei9 


Sentence  Structure  in  Virgil  27' 

the  relatively  simple  structure  of  these  lines  is  noteworthy  and 
significant.*  But  most  of  the  poem  of  Lucretius  is  expressed 
in  as  complex  structure  as  characterizes  ordinary  scientific 
prose.  Compare  for  example  this  piece  of  pure  exposition  from 
the  Auctor  ad  Herennium : 

"Quoniaiu  igitur  docilem,  benivolum,  attentum  auditorem  habere 
volumus,  quo  modo  quidque  eflBci  possit,  aperiemus. 

Dociles  auditores  habere  poterimus,  si  summam  causae  breviter  ex- 
ponemus  et  si  attentos  eos  faciemus;  nam  docilis  est  quit  attente  vult 
audire. 

Attentos  habebimus,  si  pollicebimur  nos  de  rebus  magnis,  novis,  in- 
usitatis  verba  facturos  aut  de  iis,  quae  ad  rem  publicam  pertineat  aut 
ad  eos  ipsos,  qui  au.lient,  aut  ad  deorum  inmortalium  re- 
ligionem;  et  si  rogabimus,  ut  attente  audiant;  et  si  nuniero  exponemus 
res,  quibus  de  rebus  dicturi  sumus." 

Ad  Herennium  I,  iv,  7. 


b  a       b 

d        I'c'        di     c       d 


r        d  c        d  c       d 

e        f  c        d  e       f 

R       h 
1        i 

It  is  therefore  apparent  that  the  sentence  structure  is  com- 
paratively independent  of  the  particular  literary  form  in  which 
the  production  is  expressed.  The  objection  might  be  urged 
against  the  application  of  this  method  of  investigation  to  poe- 
try that  the  exigencies  of  metrical  expression  are  so  great  as  to 
obliterate  a  writer's  personal  preference  for  one  or  another 
form  of  sentence  structure.  But  it  has  already  been  noted  in 
connection  with  the  last  two  passages  cited  that  the  structure 
of  a  great  poem  may  approximately  correspond  to  that  of  the 
most  abstract  scientific  prose.  It  seems  clear,  therefore,  that 
metrical  composition  does  not  necessarily  require  any  funda- 
mentally different  type  of  organization  from  prose.  Undoubt- 
edly, the  exigencies  of  meter  do  influence  an  author's  style  in 
some  degree.    This  is  especially  apt  to  be  the  case  with  an  au- 

♦  See  also  page  35. 


28  Sentence  Structure  in  Virgii, 

thor  who  expresses  himself  more  readily  in  prose,  and  is  not 
fully  master  of  meter.  But  a  comparison  of  the  prose  and  poe- 
try of  Seneca  or  of  Columella  makes  it  evident  that  the  pecu- 
liarities of  an  author's  prose  style  are  often  traceable  in  his 
poetry  also.  One  of  the  most  marked  characteristics  of  Seneca's 
prose  style  is  his  large  use  of  the  isolating  structure,  as  in  the 
following : 

"Quare  tamen  deus  tarn  iniquus  in  distributione  rati  fuit,  ut  bonis 
viris  paupertatem  et  volnera  et  acerba  funera  adscriberet?"  Non  potest 
artifex  mutare  materiam:  haec  passa  est.  Quaedam  separari  a  quibus- 
dam  non  possunt,  cohaerent,  individua  sunt.  Languida  ingenia  et  in 
somnum  itura  aut  in  vigiliam  somno  simillimam  inertibus  nectuntur 
elementis:  ut  efficiatur  vir  cum  cura  dicendus,  fortlore  fato  opus  est. 
Non  erit  illi  planum  iter:  sursum  oportet  ac  deorsum  eat,  fluctuetur  ac 
navigiuni  in  tubido  regat:  contra  fortunam  illi  tenendus  est  cursns. 

De  Prov.  V.  9. 


The  same  tendency  is  observable  in  the  Medea — even  in  the 
less  impassioned  portions,  and  in  the  words  of  Creon  as  well  as 
Medea. 

Creon.     Medea,  Colchi  noxium  Aeetae  genus, 
180  nondum  meis  exportat  o  regnis  pedem? 

raolitur  aliquid:  nota  fraus,  nota  est  manus. 

cui  parcet  ilia  quemve  securum  sinet? 

abolere  propere  pessimam  ferro  luem 

equidem  parabam:   precibus  evicit  gener. 
185  concessa  vita  est,  libert^t  fines  metu 

abeatque  tuta.  fert  gradum  contra  ferox 

minaxque  nostros  propius  affatus  petit. 

arcete,  famuli,  tactu  et  accessu  procul, 

iubete  sileat,  regium  iinperium  pati 
190  aliquando  discat,  vade  veloci  fuga 

monstrumque  saevum  horribile  iamdudum  avehe. 
*        *        *        * 
Medea.    Difficile  quam  sit  animum  ab  ira  flectere 
iam  concitatum  quaraque  regale  hoc  putet 
205  sceptris  superbas  quisciuis  admovit  manus, 

qua  coepit  ire,  regia  didici  mea. 

quamvis  enim  sim  clade  miseranda  obruta, 

expulsa  supplex  sola  deserta,  undique 

afflicta,  quondam  nobili  fulsi  patre 


Sentence  Structure  in  Virgil  29 

210  avoque  clarum  Sole  deduxi  genus. 

quodcumque  placidis  flexibus  Phasis  rigat 

Pontusque  quidquid  Scythicus  a  tergo  videt, 

palustribus  qua  maria  dulcescunt  aquis, 

armata  peltis  quidquid  exterret  cohors 
215  inclusa,  ripis  vidua  Tliermodontiis, 

hoc  omne  noster  genitor  imperio  regit. 

generosa,  felix,  decore  regali  potens 

fuJsi:  petebant  tunc  meos  ttialamos  proci, 

qui  nunc  petuntur.  rapida  fortuna  ac  levis 
220  praecepsque  regno  eripuit  exilio  dedit. 

confide  regnis,  cum  levis  magnas  opes 

hue  ferat  et  illuc  casus — hoc  reges  habent 

magnificum  et  ingens,  nulla  quod  rapiat  dies: 

prodesse  miseris,  supplices  fido  lare 
225  protegere,  solum  hoe  Colchico  regno  extuli, 

decus  illud  ingens  Graeciae  et  florem  inclitum, 

praesidia  Achivae  gentis  et  prolem  deum 

servasse  memet. 

Medea:     179-191  and  203-228. 

179  ' — '"^ 

^'^  a        b 

Aol  „  K         I         o  K         I         o  K 

182 

183 
185 
186 

188 
203 


207 


211 


217 


221 


a        b     I     (a)      b     I     a        b     |     a         b       bi 


a       b|b|b|b|b|b  A       B       Bi 


30  Sentence  Structure  in  Virgii, 

Columella  is  master  of  a  simple,  clear,  and  dignified  prose 
style,  characterized  by  rather  short,  clear-cut  sentences,  with 
but  one  degree  of  analysis,  and  by  the  occasional  occurrence 
of  short  simple  sentences. 

"Sed  et  post  haec  non  ignorabit  dominus  loci,  plus  posse  qualitatem 
caeli  frigidam  vel  calidam,  siccam  vel  roscidam,  grandinosam  ventosam- 
que  vel  placldam,  serenam  vel  nebulosam:  frigidaeque  aut  nebulosae 
duorum  generum  vltes  aptabit,  seu  praecoques,  quarum  maturitas  fru- 
gum  praecurrit  hiemem;  seu  firmi  durique  acini,  quarum  inter  caligines 
uvae  deflorescunt,  et  mox  gelicidiis  ac  pruinis,  ut  aliarum  calorlbus, 
mitescunt.  ventoso  quoque  et  tumultuoso  statu  caeli  fidenter  easdem 
tenaces  ac  duri  acini  committet.  rursus  calido  teniores  uberioresque 
concredet,  sicco  destinabit  eas,  quae  pluviis  aut  continuis  roribus- 
putrescunt;  roscido,  quae  siccitatibus  laborant;  grandinoso  quae  foliis 
duris  latisque  sunt,  quo  melius  protegant  fructum.  nam  placida  et 
serena  regio  nullam  non  recipit:  commodissime  tamen  eam,  cuius  vel 
uvae  vel  acini  celeriter  decidunt." 

De  Re  Rustica,  III.,  i,  6-7. 


a        b 


The  tenth  Book  of  the  De  Re  Rustica  is  written  in  verse, 
■intended,  as  the  author  says,  to  serve  as  a  fifth  Georgic,  in  ac- 
cordance with  the  suggestion  of  Virgil.  The  selection  cited 
from  the  third  Book  is  on  the  care  of  vines ;  the  one  given  be- 
low from  the  tenth  Book  is  on  the  care  of  gardens.  Both,  of 
course,  are  didactic  in  their  nature.  Observe  the  use  of  short, 
clear  sentences,  with  little  analysis,  in  both. 


*  "o"  Is  used  to  denote  the  object,  in  cases  where  its  indication  is  neces- 
sary to  malse  the  structure  of  the  sentence  clear. 


Sentence  Structure  in  Virgil  31 

Tu  gravibus  rastris  cunctantia  perfode  terga, 

tu  penitus  latis  eradere  viscera  marris 

ne  dubita,  et  summo  frondenti  cespite  mista 

ponere,  quae  canis  iaceant  urenda  pruinis, 
75  veroeribus  gelidis  iraeque  obnoxia  Caurl, 

alliget  ut  saevus  Boreas,  Eurusque  resolvat. 

post  ubi  Riphaeae  torpentia  frigore  brumae 

candidus  aprica  Zephyrus  relegaverit  aura, 

sidereoque  polo  cedet  Lyra  mersa  profundo, 
80     veris  et  advenum  nidis  cantarit  hirundo. 

rudere  turn  pingui,  solido  vel  stercore  aselli, 

armentive  fimo  saturet  ieiunia  terrae, 

ipse  ferens  olitor  diductos  pondere  qualos: 

pabula  nee  pigeat  fesso  praebere  novali, 
85     immundis  quaecunque  void  it  latrina  cloacis. 

densaque  iam  pluviis,  durataque  summa  pruinis 

aequora  dulcis  humi  repetat  mucrone  bidentis. 

mox  bene  cum  glebis  vivacem  cespitis  herbam 

contundat  marrae  vel  fracti  dente  ligonis, 
90    putria  maturi  solvantur  ut  ubera  campi. 

tunc  tritura  solum  splendentia  sarcula  sumat, 

angustosque  foros  adverso  limite  ducens, 

rursus  in  obliquum  distinguat  tramite  parvo. 

verum  ubi  iam  puro  discrimine  pectita  tellus, 
95     deposito  squalore  nitens  sua  semina  poscit, 

pangite  tunc  varios  terrestria  sidera  flores, 

Candida  leucoia,  et  flaventia  lumina  calthae, 

narcissique  comas,  et  hiantis  saeva  leonis 

ora  feri,  calathisque  virentia  lilia  canis, 
100  nee  non  vel  niveos,  vel  caeruleos  hyacinthos. 

De  Rebus  Rusticig  X,  71-100. 

a        b     I     a         b       bi 


c      d        c        d  ci      di 

77  • , 


86  —    r^ 

a       b 


88 


a        b  (a'     b 


94  ^^^ ' — ;^]^ 

a         b  A        B 


32  Sentence  Structure  in  Virgii. 

In  some  passages  of  the  tenth  Book  there  is  a  little  more 
elaboration  and  a  little  more  irregularity  of  structure  than  in 
the  prose  books,  with  a  little  more  associative  linking,  but  in 
general  the  movement  is  about  the  same.  The  writer  is  evi- 
dently slightly  hampered  by  the  requirements  of  the  meter, 
but  it  does  not  obliterate  his  peculiarities  of  style. 

2.    RELATION  TO  SUBJECT  MATTER. 

The  attempt  to  discover  the  extent  to  which  the  nature  of 
a  writer's  subject  matter  influences  his  sentence  structure  is  a 
more  complex  and  difficult  problem.  Perhaps  the  best  oppor- 
tunity for  investigation  is  found  in  a  comparison  of  the  Georgics 
and  the  Aeneid,  for  here  we  have  two  great  poems  by  the  same 
author,  with  the  same  metrical  structure,  separated  in  time  by 
but  a  short  interval.  The  great  difference  between  them  is  in 
the  nature  of  the  subject  matter ;  one  is  didactic,  the  other  epic 
in  content.  The  divergence  in  sentence  structure,  however,  is 
not  marked.  In  both  poems  there  is  the  same  pronounced  ten- 
dency to  associative  linking,  the  same  flowing  character  to  the 
movement  of  thought.  But  in  the  Georgics — at  least  in  the 
more  purely  didactic  portions  of  the  poem — there  is  a  little 
more  variation  and  irregularity  in  the  form  of  the  larger 
thought  units,  a  little  more  abruptness  of  expression,  and  a 
larger  use  of  those  connectives  which  imply  logical  relation,  e. 
g.,  there  are  many  more  co-ordinating  causal  connectives,  more 
words  expressing  purpose,  and  a  slightly  larger  use  of  dis- 
junctives as  compared  with  simple  cumulative  conjunctions, 
with  a  smaller  use  of  temporal  connectives  and  relative  pro- 
nouns. Perhaps  the  most  consp'cuous  difference  is  the  compar- 
ative infrequency  in  the  Georgics  of  the  binary  structure  which 
is  such  a  marked  characteristic  of  the  Aeneid. 

Most  of  these  differences  are  illustrated  in  the  following 
selections : 

GeorcTiVs  TT,  .^46-361 
346  ■ 


(a       b)         a       b  A       B        (a)       b        (a)        b        a        b         a        b         a        b 

(a)     b     I     a        b     I     a      (b) 
c       d  c       d 


354 


a         a  b  a  ai         a 

c        d        di 


18 
.25 

-30 

592 

594 

597 
600 

603 
606 

468 
473 

481 
483 

486 
488 


Sentence  Structure  in  Virgil 

Georgics  IV,  18-32 


33 


a         ai        b         a2  as         ai        bi 


c        d         c        d  O        D         o        D 


A  a  b  bi  B 

c        d         di 
e  t      ~^U 


a         ai  ai>  b         a»         bi 

Aeneid  VIII,  592-607 
abb 


a         a         b         b  a        b  ai       bi 


a        b     I     a         b        ai      bi 


a         a         b         b 
c        d 


a         ai  b         as        bi         bj 


a         a  b         b 

Aeneid  XII,  468-499 
a        b        bi    I     a        b         bi 


a       b         bi       bs  A  B         Bi      B2       Bs  I      B 

a         b  bi  ba 

a  b  bi  A        B 

a        b  I     a  b  ai       bx 

a          a  b  bt 


34  Sentence  Structure  in  Virgil 

a        b        bi  a        b~~b] 

494    ^_^ 

Bi       B2       Bs 

Similar  divergencies  in  sentence  structure  may  be  detect- 
ed between  the  Satires  and  Epistles  of  Horace,  upon  the  one 
hand,  and  the  Odes  upon  the  other.  Here,  however,  the  ques- 
tion is  complicated  by  the  fact  that  there  is  a  wide  difference 
in  the  metrical  structure  employed  in  the  two  cases,  which  may 
have  something  to  do  with  the  difference  in  sentence  struc- 
ture. 

Quae  virtus  et  quanta,  boni,  sit  vivere  parvo — 

nee  meus  hie  sermo  est,  sed  quae  praecepit  Ofellus 

rusticus,  abnormis  sapiens,  crassaque  Minerva — 

discite  non  inter  lances  mensasque  nitentis, 
5       cum  stupet  insanis  acies  fulgoribus  et  cum 

adclinis  falsis  animus  meliora  recusat, 

verum  liic  impransi  mecum  disquirite.    cur  hoc? 

dicam,  si  potero.     Male  verum  examinat  omnis 

corruptus  index,    leporem  sectatus  equove 
10     lassus  ab  indomito  vel,  si  Romana  fatisat 

militia  adsuetum  graecari,  sen  pila  velox 

molliter  austerum  studio  fallente  laborem 

seu  te  discus  agit,  pete  cedentem  aera  disco; 

cum  labor  extuderit  fastidia,  siccus,  inanis. 
15     sperne  cibum  vilem;  nisi  Hymettia  mella  Falerno 

ne  biberis  diluta. 

Sermones  II,  2;  1-16.. 


a        b 


aVa        b  a'~'a  b  A 

Nullus  argento  color  est  avaris 
abdito  terris,  inimice  lamnae 
Crispe  Sallusti,  nisi  temperato 

splendeat  usu. 
vivet  extento  Proculeius  aevo, 
notus  in  fratres  animi  paterni: 
ilium  aget  pinna  metuente  solvl 

fama  superstes. 


Sentence  Structure  in  Virgii. 


35 


latius  regnes  avidum  domando 
10     spiritum,  quam  si  Libyam  remotis 
Gadibus  iungas  et  uterque  Poenus 

serviat  uni. 
crescit  indulgens  sibi  dirus  hydrops 
nee  sitim  pellit,  nisi  causa  morbi 
15     fugerit  venis  et  aquosus  albo 
corpore  languor, 
redditum  Cyri  solio  Phraaten 
dissidens  plebi  numero  beatorum 
eximit  Virtus  populumque  falsis 
20        dedocet  uti 

vocibus,  regnum  et  diadema  tutum 
deferens  uni  propriamque  laurum, 
quisquis  ingentis  oculo  inretorto 
spectat  acervoB. 


Odea  II,  2. 


a        b     I     a        b 


a        b 

c        d  ci       di 


13 


b 
c        d 


17 


b 
c        d 


The  same  problem  may  also  be  approached  by  a  compari- 
son of  different  portions  of  the  same  work,  in  which  the  tone 
of  the  subject  matter  is  so  different  as  practically  to  alter  the 
character  of  the  work  for  the  time  being.  We  have  already 
noted*  the  fact  that  in  his  most  highly  poetic  and  emotional 
passages,  Lucretius  expresses  himself  in  a  simple  form  of  sen- 
tence structure,  approximating  the  Virgilian  manner,  and  vary- 
ing widely  from  his  own  customary  style.  The  structure  of 
the  Fourth  Georgic,  which  closes  with  the  semi-epic  of  the  myth 
of  Arethusa,  approaches  quite  closely  that  of  the  earlier  books 
of  the  Aeneid.  We  should  perhaps  be  prone  to  ascribe  this  to 
the  gradual  development  of  the  poet's  style,  were  it  not  for 


•  Page  27. 


36  Sentence  Structure  in  Virgil 

the  fact  that  the  sentence  formation  of  the  Eclogues  resembles 
that  of  the  Aeneid  fully  as  closely  as  does  that  of  the  Georgics. 
It  is  interesting  also  to  compare  the  passage  in  Lucretius  I.,  250- 
26],  with  one  almost  identical  in  content  in  the  Georgics,  II., 
325-335. 

250  postremo  pereunt  imbres,  ubi  eos  pater  aether 

in  gremium  matris  terrai  praecipitavit; 

at  nitidae  surgunt  fruges  ramique  virescunt 

arboribus,  crescunt  ipsae  fetuque  gravantur; 

hinc  alitur  porro  nostrum  genus  atque  ferarum, 
255  hinc  laetas  urbes  pueris  florere  videmus 

frondiferasque  novis  avibus  canere  undique  silvas; 

hinc  fessae  pecudes  pingui  per  pabula  laeta 

corpora  deponunt  et  candens  lacteus  umor 

uberibus  manat  distentis;  hinc  nova  proles 
260  artubus  inflrmis  teneras  lasciva  per  herbas 

ludit  lacte  mero  mentes  perculsa  novellas. 

Lucretius  I,  250-261. 


250 


ai      bi    I     a         b         bi         a       ai      b 


b     I     a        b         ai      b] 
d         c       d 


325  turn  pater  omnipotens  fecundis  imbribus  aether 

coniugis  in  gremium  laetae  descendit,  et  omnis 

magnus  alit  magno  commixtus  corpore  fetus. 

avia  tum  resonant  avibus  virgulta  canoris, 

et  Venerem  certis  repetunt  armenta  diebus; 
330  parturit  almus  ager,  zephyrique  tepentibus  auris. 

laxant  arva  sinus;  superat  tener  omnibus  umor; 

inque  novos  soles  audent  se  germina  tuto 

credere,  nee  metuit  surgentis  pampinus  austros 

aut  actum  caelo  magnis  aquilonibus  imbrem, 
335  sed  trudit  gemmas  et  frondes  explicat  omnis. 

Georgics    II,    325-335. 


32.5 


328 


bi 


bi     I     a        b       81        bi     I     a        b        ai       bi 


bo       (a) 


One  is  impressed  at  once  with  the  fact  that  in  this  passage 
Lucretius,  departing  from  his  usual  manner,  has  expressed  him- 
self in  almost  exactly  the  same  sentence  structure  afterward 
used  by  Virgil  in  a  passage  of  similar  purport.     The  style  is 


Sentence  Structure  in  Virgil  37 

characteristic  of  Virgil,  but  not  of  Lucretius.  Of  course,  one 
must  take  into  consideration  the  possibility  that  Virgil  has  here 
copied  after  Lucretius,  or  that  both  have  drawn  from  a  com- 
mon source.  But  upon  a  closer  examination,  one  does  not  fail 
to  find  the  characteristic  differences  between  the  two  writers 
even  in  these  citations.  Virgil  has  no  analysis,  in  one  ease  ex- 
pressing with  a  co-ordinate  sentence  exactly  the  same  idea 
which  Lucretius  has  expressed  in  a  subordinate  clause,  and  he 
makes  a  larger  use  of  purely  cumulative  conjunctions,  where 
Lucretius  has  used  more  connectives  which  imply  other  rela- 
tions. And  this  fact  receives  even  greater  weight  if  the  hy- 
pothesis of  borrowing  is  adopted,  for  in  that  case  we  have  Vir- 
gil's marked  characteristics  apparent  even  in  the  use  of  an- 
other's material. 

It  is  of  course  difficult  to  draw  any  line  of  demarcation  be- 
tween the  influence  exerted  upon  a  writer's  style  by  his  per- 
sonality and  that  exerted  by  his  subject  matter,  because  the 
writer's  personality  is  so  apt  to  influence  his  choice  of  subject 
matter.  But  upon  the  whole,  it  is  safe  to  say  that  the  choice  of 
subject  matter  often  influences  a  writer's  sentence  structure  in 
a  given  work,  though  such  variations  are  less  marked  than  those 
due  to  temperament. 

3.     RELATION  TO  TEMPERAMENT. 

The  latter  may  best  be  investigated  by  comparing  works 
of  the  same  character,  couched  in  the  same  literary  form,  but 
by  different  authors.  Such  a  comparison  of  Virgil  with  other 
writers  is  hampered  by  the  fact  that  we  have  only  fragments  of 
the  epic  poets  who  preceded  him  (unless  we  class  Lucretius  as 
an  epic  poet),  and  also  by  the  fact  that  he  was  almost  univer- 
sally adopted  as  a  model  of  style  by  lat'er  writers,  especially 
epic  poets.  In  the  case  of  writers  who  consciously  modelled 
after  Virgil,  it  is  difficult,  if  not  impossible,  to  tell  just  how  far 
the  correspondences  are  due  to  the  fact  that  they  have  adopted 
a  Virgilian  manner  of  organizing  their  sentences. 

The  fragments  of  Ennius,  however,  are  sufficiently  exten- 
sive so  that  we  can  gain  a  fairly  accurate  idea  of  the  general 
organization  of  his  thought.  The  difference  between  this  and 
Virgil's  style  is  moreover  of  especial  significance,  as  Virgil  was 
to  such  a  large  extent  indebted  to  Ennius.  The  comparison 
shows  a  considerably  larger  use  of  the  appercept've  form  than 
is  usual  with  Virgil. 


38  Sentence  Structure  in  Virgii. 

ANNALES  I,  xlvii 


79 


32 


84 


92 


95 


194 


197 


199 


201 


35 


40 


a        b         bi        a         b     |      b 


a        b     I     a        b 
c        d  c       d 


a        b 


c        d  <■'        I)  A        B  Bi 

e         f  c        d 


a        b        A        B  Bi 


c  ci        d 


ANNALES    VI,    xii 


a         b  ai      bi  I     a  b  b  |     a        b 


a  a'~'ab         b'~'b        A  B  a  b: 


a         b  A         B        (A)       B 


a        b  (a         b)  a        b 


ALEXANDER   I 


a  a         b         b  a  b 


a         b 
c         d 
e        t 


Sentence  Structure  in  Virgil  39 

43  r^K 


The  fragments  of  the  dramatic  works  of  Ennius,  Pacuvius, 
and  Accius  show  the  same  general  character.  Even  Plautus, 
though  his  style  is  largely  influenced  by  the  preference  of  the 
piebeius  sermo  for  isolation  and  co-ordination,  makes  a  consid- 
erable use  of  subordinate  constructions. 

The  treatment  of  the  style  of  the  later  epi-c  writers,  as  com- 
pared with  Virgil,  will  be  postponed,  for  the  sake  of  conveni- 
ence, until  the  details  of  Virgil's  sentence  structure  have  been 
more  fully  developed. 


III.    CHIEF  CHARACTERISTICS  OF  VIRGIL'S  SENTENCE: 

STRUCTURE. 

1.     PREDOMINANCE  OF  ASSOCIATIVE   ELEMENTS. 

Whether  Virgil's  preference  for  the  associative  type  of 
sentence  structure  is  a  reversion  (in  the  development  of  Latin 
literature)  to  a  more  primitive  .type,  as  exemplified  in  the- 
Homeric  poems  for  instance,  or  whether  it  is  due  to  the  pecu- 
liar cast  of  the  poet's  temperament,  it  is  at  all  events  a  most 
marked  characteristic.  The  vast  majority  of  Virgil's  sentences 
are  compound.  Detached  simple  sentences  are  comparatively 
rare,  and  of  subordinate  sentences,  but  171  occur  in  Book  II,. 
208  in  Book  IV,  183  in  Book  VIII,  and  241  in  Book  XII.* 

a.     Types  of  Associative  Sentences. 

(1)     The  Double  Sentence. 

Of  the  compound  sentences,  one  particular  type  seems 
characteristic  of  Virgil,  especially  in  the  Aeneid.  This  is  the- 
compound  sentence  of  two  members.  The  following  are  typi- 
cal examples : 

suspensi  Eurypylum  scitantem  oracula  Phoebi 
mittimus,  isque  adytis  haec  tristia  dicta  reportat: 

Aen.  II,  114-115. 

a        b         ai        bi 

natat  uncta  carina, 
frondentisque  ferunt  remos  et  robora  silvis 
infabricata  fugae  studio. 

Aen.  IV,  398-400. 

nee  non  et  gemini  custodes  limine  ab  alto 
praecedunt  gressumque  canes  comitantur  erilem. 

Aen.  VIII,  461-462. 

procedit  legio  Ausonidum,  pilataque  plenis 
agmina  se  fundunt  portis. 

Aen.  XII,  121-122. 

♦These  four  books  of  Virgil  are  selected  as  the  basis  for  the  data  which- 
follo-w  because  they  contain  all  the  principal  varieties  of  subject  matter- 
which  make  up  the  Aeneid:  the  second  book  contains  the  story  of  the  sack 
of  Troy,  narrative-descriptive  epic;  the  fourth  book  contains  the  ne-wer  Vlr- 
g-ilian  "contribution — the  dramatic  romance  of  the  Dido  episode;  the  eighth 
booK  is  made  up  of  more  subdued  narration  and  description,  while  the  twelfth 
book  contains  the  battle  epic  of  the  war  with  Turnn.s.  A  more  cursory  exam- 
ination of  the  other  books  fails  to  reveal  any  peculiarities  of  structure  not 
sufficiently   accounted   for   in   the   detailed  examination  of  the  books  mentioned.. 


Sentence  Structure  in  Virgil  41 

Other  examples  are  found  in  Book  II,  118-119,  250-252, 
363-366,  482-483,  484-485,  710-711;  IV,  509-511,  632-533,663- 
665;  VIII,  518-519,  530-531;  XII,  25-26,  462-463,  693,  921-923. 

An  exceedingly  frequent  variation  of  this  form  is  that  in 
which  one  subject  is  construed  with  two  predicates. 

turn  vero  Teucri  incumbunt  et  litore  celsas 
deducunt  toto  navis. 

Aen.  IV,  397-398. 


The  first  and  last  sentences  of  Book  II,  the  first  of  Book 
IV,  and  the  last  of  Book  VIII  and  of  Book  XII  are  of  this  form, 
while  the  first  sentences  of  Books  VIII  and  XII  and  the  last  of 
Book  IV  contain  binary  elements  in  combination.  This  type 
of  sentence  seems  to  possess  a  lyric  element ;  it  often  occurs  as 
a  sort  of  interlude  or  refrain,  in  quiet  narrative  or  descriptive 
passages  which  serve  as  means  of  transition  between  the  more 
stirring  portions  of  the  work.  But  it  is  by  no  means  confined 
to  such  passages.  It  occurs  more  than  80  times  in  Book  II 
alone,  sometimes  isolated,  and  sometimes  in  combination  with 
other  elements.  Examples  are:  II,  145,  146-147,  234,  571-574, 
619-620,  757-759 ;  IV,  184-188,  219-222,  504-508 ;  VIII,  124,  125, 
608-611 ;  XII,  672,  758-759,  849-852,  853-854,  855.  The  form  fre- 
quently finds  its  way  even  into  the  subordinate  members  of 
complex  sentences,  as  in  II,  21-28,  176-179 ;  XII,  561-564.  It  is 
used  with  increasing  frequency  in  the  latter  books  of  the 
Aeneid,  and  occurs  over  140  times  in  Book  XII.  Such  extensive 
use,  of  course,  renders  it  a  dominating  type  of  expression.  In 
the  Eclogues  it  occurs  occasionally,  but  by  no  means  as  often  as 
in  the  Aeneid.  In  the  Georgics,  it  is  much  more  common,  but 
somewhat  less  frequent  than  in  the  Aeneid. 

(a)  Binary  sentence  structure isnotinfrequentin the  literature 
of  several  languages.  It  seems  to  occur  most  often  in  rather 
primitive  literature,  especially  that  which  contains  a  lyric  ele- 
ment. It  is  very  common  in  Hebrew  literature,  gnomic  as  well 
as  lyric.  Its  pychological  motive,  in  some  cases  at  least,  seems  to 
be  to  present  two  sides,  so  to  speak,  of  an  object  of  thought,  and 
so  to  make  a  deeper  or  a  more  accurate  impression  upon  the 
mind  of  the  hearer  or  reader.  Of  course,  many  objects  of 
thought  have  more  than  two  aspects,  and  the  impression  might 
conceivably  be  made  clearer  still  by  presenting  more  than  two. 
But  on  the  other  hand,  the  mind  of  the  hearer  or  reader  might 


42  Sentence  Structure  in  Virgil 

be  confused  by  presenting  so  many  closely  united  successive 
factors.  In  simple  language,  two  seems  to  be  the  limit  most 
commonly  arrived  at  by  the  process  of  mutual  give  and  take — 
the  adaptation  of  speaker  to  hearer.  The  human  mind  is  prone 
to  express  itself  in  pairs.  This  finds  its  reflex  in  such  common 
sayings  as  "there  are  two  sides  to  every  question."  It  is  not 
unlikely,  too,  that  this  habit  of  expression  may  be  due  in  part 
to  the  binary  nature  of  many  facts  of  experience — to  the  large 
number  of  concepts  which  involve  a  contrast,  and  so  occur  only 
in  pairs,  such  as  cold  and  heat,  high  and  low,  day  and  night. 
Such  a  habit  if  speech  may  conceivably  be  extended  beyond  its 
original  bounds  and  applied  to  concepts  which  are  not  neces- 
sarily of  a  dual  nature.*  Or  again,  the  causes  of  the  phenome- 
na may  have  to  be  sought  in  subtle  and  little  understood,  but 
deepseated,  impulses  in  the  human  soul  which  tend  uncon- 
sciously toward  rhythmic  forms  of  expression.** 

Man;v  writers  make  use  of  a  binary  form  of  sentence  for 
the  purpose  of  bringing  out  contrasts,  antitheses,  etc.  It  is 
noteworthy  that  Virgil  seldom  resorts  to  this  common  expedi- 
cn.    A  binary  sentence  like  that  in  Aeneid  VIII,  530-531, 

obstipuere  animis  alii,  sed  Troius  heros 
adgnovit  sonitum  et  divae  promissa  parentis. 

in  which  contrast  or  opposition  between  the  members  is  ex- 
pressed, is  so  unusual  as  to  attract  attention  at  once.  Virgil 
seems  rather  to  deepen  the  impression  by  cumulative  additions, 
like  the  successive  strokes  of  a  painter's  brush. 

Possibly  the  binary  nature  of  the  hexameter  line  may  have 
operated  to  encourage  the  natural  tendency  toward  binary  ex- 
pression, but  the  binary  sentences  in  Virgil  do  not  appear  to 
occupy  tny  particular  number  of  lines,  and  the  division  be- 
tween the  members  does  not  regularly  fall  at  any  fixed  place 
in  the  line.  The  phenomenon  is  one  to  be  accounted  for  chiefly 
by  psychological  considerations,  not  metrical  ones;  its  causes 
are  not  external,  but  internal.  In  its  large  use,  Virgil  has  con- 
sciouslv  or  unconsciously  conformed  to  an  instinctive  tendency 


•For  a  treatniPiit  of  somo  aiialofroiis  phenomena  'n  Greek  literature,  see  E. 
Kemmer:  Die  Polare  Ausdru<'ksweise  in  der  GrietMische  Literatur,  in  Bei- 
traege  r.v.r  Ilistorisolien  Syntax  der  Grieehisehen  Spraohe,  edited  by  M.  Sfhanz. 
Wuertzburg.  1903.  and  also  Henrich  :  Die  Sogenannte  Polare  Ansdncksweise  ini 
Grleschischen,  Neustadt,  1899. 

♦♦Compare  the  chapter  on  the  Rhytlim  of  Motion,  in  Herbert  Spencer's 
First  Principles. 


Sentence  Structure  in  Virgil  43 

of  the  human  mind,  which  has  usually  found  its  fullest  expres- 
sion in  literature  which  is  not  dominated  by  rigid  conventions.* 

(2)      LONGER  ASSOCIATIVE  SERIES. 

Associative  groups  of  more  than  two  members  are  not  in- 
frequent in  Virgil.  Groups  of  four  and  even  five  or  six  mem- 
bers are  sometimes  found,  but  the  triple  group  is  more  fre- 
quent than  the  more  extensive  ones.  These  larger  groups  are 
seldom  found  in  the  Eclogues,  but  are  quite  common  in  the 
Oeorgics.  They  are  not  numerous  in  the  earlier  books  of  the 
Aeneid,  but  increase  in  number  until  they  are  rather  numerous 
in  the  twelfth  Book.     Some  typical  examples  follow: 

nee  non  Ausonii  Troia  gens  missa  coloni 
versibus  incomptis  ludunt  risuque  soluto, 
oraque  corticibus  sumunt  horrenda  cavatis, 
et  te,  Bacche,  vocant  per  carmina  laeta.  tibique 
oscilla  ex  alta  suspendunt  mollia  pinu. 

Georgics  II,  385-389. 

a  b        bi       ba       b.-i 

Talia  per  Latium.     quae  Laomedontius  heros 
cuncta  videns  magno  curarum  fluctuat  aestu, 
atque  animum  nunc  hue  celerem,  nunc  dividit  illuc, 
in  partisque  rapit  varias  perque  omnia  versat: 
sicut  aquae  tremulum  labris  ubi  lumen  aenis 
sole  repercussum  aut  radiantis  imagine  lunae 
omnia  pervolitat  late  loca  iamque  sub  auras 
erigitur  summique  ferit  lacuaria  tecti. 

Aen.  VIII,  18-25. 


C  (I  Cli  (ij 

Further  examples  are  found  in  Georgics  II,  403-407;  IV, 
67-81;  Aen.  II,  699-700;  IV,  391-392,  362-364;  VIII,  59-65, 
175-178,  179-181,  213-218,  273-275,  310-312;  XII,  353-358,  473- 
480,  509-512,  554-556.  Such  associative  chains  are  usually  used 
to  describe  the  successive  steps  in  a  series  of  actions.  The  triple 

♦Compare  in  this  eonnection.  Boiicke:  Goethe's  Weltanschauung.  (Stutt- 
gart. IftOT).  esp.  p.  24S.  The  writer  shows  that  Goethe's  view  of  the  nature 
and  ordPF  of  events  in  the  natural  world  is  determined  by  his  fundamental 
eoneeption  of  the  action  and  reaction  of  mutually  opposing  forces,  and  that 
this  conception  of  "polarity"  came  to  b  a  dominating  factor  in  all  his  works. 
As  a  rule,  each  character  in  Goethe's  work  has  its  opposite  character;  when 
one  quality  is  described,  the  opjiosite  nnility  is  also  brought  out.  Similarly, 
tliough  he  does  not  deal  in  antitheses.  Virgil's  form  of  expression  came  to 
partake  largely  of  the  double  structure  (lcscril>cd  above. 


44  Sentence  Structure  in  Virgil 

sentence,  in  particular,  is  often  employed  to  describe  the  steps 
leading  up  to  an  important  speech  or  action.  The  type  of  ex- 
pression IS  a  somewhat  primitive  one,  resembling  the  language 
commonly  used  by  children  in  telling  a  story. 

2.  ABSENCE  OF  COMPLEX  ANALYSIS. 

Closely  connected  with  this  preponderance  of  the  associa- 
tive type  is  the  scant  use  of  apperceptive  analysis.  In  the 
Aeneid,  Virgil  employs  about  one-half  as  many  subordinate 
constructions  as  are  found  in  ordinary  Latin  prose.  To  be 
more  exact,  the  second  book  of  the  Aeneid  contains  an  average 
of  33  subordinate  constructions  per  1000  words;  the  fourth 
book,  45 ;  the  eighth  book,  40 ;  and  the  twelfth  book,  40.  Book 
II  of  Caesar's  Gallic  War  contains  75  subordinate  sentences 
per  1000  words;  Cicero's  oration  for  Pompey's  Military  Com- 
mand has  72.  That  typically  Roman  writer,  the  Auctor  ad 
Herennium,  Book  I,  Ch.  iv-vii,  and  Book  IV,  Ch.  xviii-xix, 
makes  use  of  171  subordinate  clauses  in  all,  or  an  average  of 
119  per  1000  words.  For  the  four  books  of  Virgil  cited,  the 
average  number  of  subordinate  constructions  per  1000  words 
is  39 ;  for  the  prose  selections  mentioned,  78.* 

As  already  mentioned,  Virgil  seldom  employs  sentences  of 
more  than  the  second  degree  of  complexity.  Even  the  second  de- 
gree is  not  of  frequent  occurrence.  In  Book  II,  for  example,  out 
of  a  total  of  172  subordinate  sentences,  but  18  involve  the  sec- 
ond degree.  In  six  of  these,  the  infinitive  in  indirect  discourse 
forms  one  degree ;  in  three,  the  structure  is  complicated  by  the 
occurrence  of  involved  similes ;  in  one,  the  second  degree  is 
formal  rather  than  real,  having  the  form  of  a  cmn  invers7wi 
construction ;  in  one,  a  long  conditional  sentence  is  suddenly 
broken  off  and  an  irregular  conclusion  added ;  in  one,  the  text 
is  doubtful;  but  six  are  left  in  which  some  more  or  less  dis- 
turbing element  does  not  enter.  Of  these  18  sentences,  three 
also  involve  a  third  degree  of  analysis,  but  one  of  these  is  the 
sentence  with  broken  construction,  and  another  contains  an 
infinitive  in  indirect  discourse ;  but  one  clear  case  of  the  third 
degree  is  left  in  the  entire  book,  and  even  here  the  question 
might  possibly  be  raised  whether  a  certain  relative  clause  is 
not  virtually  independent.    If  this  view  is  taken,  the  sentence 

♦The  prose  passages  taken  were  chosen   as   typical   examples   of  narration, 
oratory,  and  abstract  exposition,  of  the  period    immediately    preceding-    Virsil- 


Sentence  Structure  in  Virgil  45 

would  be  broken  up  into  two  sentences,  each  involving  but  one 
degree  of  complexity.  About  the  same  degree  of  complexity 
obtains  in  the  other  three  books  examined  as  in  the  second 
book.  In  ordinary  prose,  on  the  other  hand,  the  third  and  even 
the  fourth  degree  of  analysis  are  frequently  employed. 

a.    Ascending  and  Descending  Construction. 

(1)  Organization   of   Ascending   and   Descending   Members. 

The  subordinate  member  of  the  ascending  construction  in 
Virgil  most  commonly  consists  of  a  single  sentence,  but  the  bi- 
nary form  is  also  frequent.  Occasionally  one  member  of  such 
a  binary  form  is  still  further  subdivided,  consisting  of  one  sub- 
ject and  two  predicates,  but  the  full  triple  form,  consisting  of 
three  subordinate  sentences  of  equal  rank,  is  seldom  or  never 
used.  The  subordinate  member  in  the  descending  construction 
is  sometimes  more  extensive ;  one  subject  with  three  predicates 
connected  by  associative  linking  occurs  occasionally,  and  some- 
times a  binary  form  of  which  one  member  consists  of  a  subject 
with  two  predicates.  But  in  the  great  majority  of  cases,  as  in 
the  ascending  construction,  the  subordinate  member  consists 
of  but  one  or  two  sentences  of  the  same  degree  of  subordina- 
tion. 

(2)  Relation  of  Function  to  Position. 

In  the  following  classification  of  subordinate  sentences  in 
ascendii^.p  and  descending  positions,  the  functional  method  of 
groupinj;  has  been  followed,  i.  e.,  the  subordinate  clauses  have 
been  grouped  according  to  the  chief  function  which  each  serves 
in  the  sentence  where  it  occurs.  This  method  of  classification 
is  perhaps-  open  to  the  criticism  of  being  variable  and  inexact, 
but  it  is  believed  that  it  corresponds  more  closely  to  the  actual 
character  of  the  phenomena  of  language  than  a  purely  formal 
method  of  classification  would.  Multiple  clauses,  i.  e.,  those 
cons'sting  of  one  subject  with  more  than  one  predicate,  have 
been  counted  but  once.  A  sentence  is  said  to  be  in  ascending, 
descending  or  intermediate  construction  with  reference  to  the 
sentence  on  which  it  directly  depends. 

(a;  Of  807  subordinate  sentences  occurring  in  Books  II, 
IV,  VIII,  and  XII  of  the  Aeneid,  428  are  used  in  descending 
construction,  171  in  intermediate,  and  208  in  ascending.  In 
order  to  compare  these  figures  with  the  usual  practice,  as  no 
data  for  the  latter  were  available,  a  detailed  study  was  made 
of  the  three  prose  selections  mentioned  on  page  44. 


46  Skntence  Structure  in  Virgil 

(b)  In  the  three  prose  selections,  971  subordinate  sen- 
tences were  found,  of  which  509  were  used  in  the  descending' 
construction,  246  in  the  intermediate,  and  216  in  the  ascend- 
ing. On  the  basis  of  the  same  total  as  from  Virgil,  but  pre- 
serving the  proportions  last  mentioned,  this  would  make  for 
the  prope  selections,  423  in  the  descending  construction,  204 
in  the  intermediate,  and  180  in  the  ascending.  This  shows  a 
slight  excess  in  descending  constructions  in  Virgil  as  com- 
pared with  prose  usage.  We  should  perhaps  note  also  in  pass- 
ing the  deficiency  in  intermediate  constructions  in  Virgil  as 
compared  with  prose  usage,  and  the  excess  of  ascending  con- 
structions. 

(3)     Virgil's  Tendency  Toward  Descending  Structure. 

But  such  a  rough  comparison  is  very  far  from  revealing 
the  whole  truth  with  respect  to  Virgil's  use  of  ascending  and 
descending  structure,  for  Virgil  by  no  means  employs  the  same 
kinds  of  subordinate  sentences,  in  the  same  proportions,  as 
the  pros?  writers  mentioned.  We  notice  that  clauses  of  result^ 
qiiin  clauses,  and  (pure)  'substantive  clauses  are  almost  wholly 
lacking  in  Virgil,  while  clauses  of  cause,  and  characteristic 
and  restrictive  relative  clauses  are  much  less  frequent  in  Vir- 
gil than  in  the  prose  selections.  They  are  not  numerous  in 
Virgil  lor  the  reason  that  Virgil's  thought  is  largely  objective 
and  concrete,  while  these  classes  of  subordinate  sentences  are 
used  to  bring  out  relations,  abstractions,  and  closer  definition. 
But  all  these  six  classes  of  subordinate  clauses,  with  the  single 
exception  of  restrictive  relative  clauses,  occur  most  frequently 
(in  prose)  in  the  descending  construction.  Most  restrictive 
relative  clauses,  in  prose,  are  nearly  equally  divided  between 
the  intermediate  and  the  descending  construction.  Now  it  is 
evident  that  not  only  to  keep  the  balance  between  the  ascend- 
ing and  descending  constructions,  but  to  provide  an  excess 
of  the  latter,  as  Virgil  does,  he  must  use  many  subordinate 
clauses  in  the  descending  construction  which  in  prose  are  usu- 
ally found  in  the  ascending  or  intermediate  constructions,  or 
that  the  proportion  of  descending  constructions  must  be  large- 
ly increased  in  the  case  of  certain  classes  which  are  usually 
descending  in  prose  as  well.  The  first  alternative  is 
found  to  hold  in  the  case  of  clauses  of  place  and  subordinate 
adversative  clauses,  both  of  which  are  much  more  numerous 
in  Virgil  than  in  the  prose  selections.     The  second  alternative 


Sentence  Structure  in  Virgil  47 

holds  in  the  case  of  supplementary  relative  clauses  and  tem- 
poral clauses.  These  are  the  two  most  numerous  categories  in 
Virgil  and  are  much  more  frequent  in  Virgil  than  in  the  prose. 
The  increase  in  the  proportion  of  descending  constructions  in 
temporal  clauses  in  Virgil  as  compared  with  prose  usage  is 
considerable,  and  the  increase  in  descending  constructions  in 
supplementary  relative  clauses  in  Virgil  is  very  marked.  The  in- 
crease in  the  number  of  the  last  class  in  Virgil  is  also  remarkable. 
Small  losses  in  the  proportion  of  descending  constructions  are 
found  in  the  conditional  clauses  and  clauses  of  comparison. 
There  is  a  slight  gain  in  the  proportion  of  descending  con- 
structions in  Virgil's  indefinite  relative  clauses,  which  are  also 
somewhat  more  numerous  than  in  the  prose.  In  the  case  of  in- 
direct questions,  infinitive  constructions,  and  clauses  of  pur- 
pose and  manner,  no  marked  differences  are  observable  be- 
tween Virgil's  usage  and  that  olP  prose,  either  in  the  frequency 
with  which  these  clauses  occur,  or  in  the  proportion  of  ascend- 
ing and  descending  constructions  used.  There  is  a  slightly 
larger  proportion  of  descending  constructions  among  infinitive 
clauses  in  Virgil.  Clauses  of  comparison  are  most  apt  to  be 
used  in  the  descending  construction  in  Virgil,  and  in  the  in- 
termediate construction  in  prose. 

The  excess  of  descending  constructions  in  temporal  clauses 
in  Virgil  as  compared  with  prose  is  accounted  for  in  part  by 
Virgil's  frequent  use  of  the  cum  ijiversum  construction  in  nar- 
rative. Such  clauses  are  of  the  nature  of  associative  additions, 
and  are  almost  invariably  descending.  Virgil's  large  use  of 
supplementary  relative  clauses  is  one  of  the  most  marked  feat- 
ures of  Lis  style.  These  too  are  of  the  nature  of  associative 
additions,  and  occur  much  more  naturally  in  the  descending 
position  than  elsewhere.  Takmg  all  the  facts  together,  it  is 
evident  that  Virgil  has  a  marked  tendency  toward  the  larger 
use  of  the  descending  order  as  compared  with  other,  and  espe- 
cially with  older  writers. 

(4)     Difference  in  Psychological  Function  Between  Ascending 
and  Descending  Structure. 

There  is  a  very  noticeable  difference  between  the  psycholo- 
gical nature  and  use  of  the  ascending  order  and  that  of  the 
descending  order.  The  ascending  construction  tends  to  em- 
phasize the  unity  of  the  larger  thought  whole,  to  produce  a 
feeling  of  suspense,  and  to  result  in  a  climax  in  the  utterance 


48  Sentence  Structure  in  Virgil 

of  the  principal  member.  The  descending  order,  on  the  other 
hand,  tends  to  eliminate  discriminations  of  emphasis,  to  em- 
phasize relations  less,  to  place  all  the  primary  elements  of  the 
larger  thought  group  more  nearly  on  an  equality,  and  to  allow 
Ihe  attention  to  be  occupied  more  fully  with  the  emotional 
content  of  each  primary  unit  as  it  comes  into  consciousness.* 
In  the  ascending  construction  the  subordinate  member  exists 
for  the  principal  member,  or  rather  for  the  larger  thought- 
whole  to  which  they  both  belong :  in  the  descending  construc- 
tion, the  subordinate  member  exists  more  for  its  own  sake. 
An  earlier  writer**  has  pointed  out  the  fact  that  Virgil  is  prone 
to  employ  a  series  of  short  simple  sentences  to  express  these 
larger  "logical  periods,"  leaving  the  precise  relation  between 
the  primary  units  undefined.  This  general  tendency  toward 
syntactical  particularism  is  one  of  the  most  marked  Virgilian 
characteristics. 

One  is  tempted  to  suggest  an  analogy  between  the  change 
from  the  political  unity  and  submerging  of  the  individual  un- 
der the  Roman  republic  to  the  individualism  and  cosmopoli- 
tanism of  the  imperial  period,  and  the  change  from  the  unified 
periodic  structure  of  earlier  Latin  to  the  shorter  sentences  and 
more  concise  expression  of  a  Tacitus  or  a  Seneca.  Under  the 
Republic,  thought  was  objective  and  relational:  under  the  Em- 
pire, it  becomes  introspective,  subjective,  emotional.  The  emo- 
tional (tontent  of  Virgil's  poetry  has  always  been  remarked 
upon.  1'his  is  closely  connected  with  his  tendency  toward  the 
isolating  and  the  descending  sentence  structures.  He  is  a  pio- 
neer in  the  change — in  part  a  cause  and  in  part  an  effect  of  it. 
In  him  Latin  literature  finds  a  renaissance  of  the  sensitive  hu- 
man element:  it  becomes  concrete  and  subjective.  Language 
thus  employed  reflects  the  social  character  of  speech  in  the 
larger  liberty  wh^ch  is  left  for  individual  interpretation,  as 
compared  with  the  periodic  structure,  in  which  the  various 
relations  involved  are  more  closely  defined.  "The  literature  of 
power"  is  usually  literature  to  the  interpretation  of  which  the 
reader  or  hearer  himself  makes  large  contribution  from  the 
depths  of  his  own  personality.  Virgil  has  expressed  himself  in 
such  a  way  as  to  allow  the  reader  the  largest  possible  range 
for  the  play  of  those  forces  which  characterize  his  personal 


*Compai-e  Weil :     De  L'Ordre  des  Mots. 

**E.  Weissenborn:  Untersuchungeu  ueher    den  Satz-  und    reriodenbau    in 
Virgils  Aeneide. 


Sentence  Structure  in  Virgil  49 

temperament.  In  the  reading  of  Virgil,  therefore,  both  poet 
and  reader  express  themselves,  and  it  is  in  precisely  this  fact 
that  much  of  Virgil's  greatness  consists. 

(5)     Relation  to  Other  Historical  Tendencies  in  the  Latin  Lan- 
guage. 

Th'.i  drift  toward  descending  structure  and  conciseness 
of  expression  is  interesting  as  a  precursor  of  that  ' '  shift  in  the 
expression  of  relational  concepts  from  inflectional  forms  to 
single  words,"  which  has  been  styled  "the  greatest  change 
that  has  taken  place  in  language."*  In  the  history  of  the  Lat- 
in language,  all  three  changes  are  part  of  the  reaction  of  the 
thought  and  life  of  the  provinces  upon  those  of  the  older  state, 
and  find  their  fullest  expression  in  the  Romance  languages  of 
modern  Europe,  which  are  conspicuous  for  their  clear- 
ness and  conciseness  of  expression,  and  for  their 
capacity  for  emotional  content.  Virgil's  family  name 
may  or  may  not  have  been  Gallic  in  its  origin,  but 
the  poet  himself,  growing  up  as  he  did  in  the  heart  of 
Cisalpin»>  Gaul,  can  hardly  have  been  free  from  Gallic  influ- 
ence. Those  traits  in  which  he  is  greatest  are  also  distinctive 
traits  of  the  Gallic  national  temperament.  It  is  of  some  inter- 
est in  this  connection  to  compare  his  style  with  that  of  the  one 
purely  Gallic  writer  of  Latin  poetry  whose  work  is  available 
for  the  purpose.  Ausonius  was  of  Gallic  nationality  by  both 
parents,  lived  and  wrote  in  Gaul,  and  was  professor  of  rhetoric 
in  a  Gallic  university.  His  poems,  especially  his  "Mosella," 
by  whi(;h  he  is  best  known,  show  a  comparatively  simple  sen- 
tence structure,  containing  somewhat  more  complexity  than 
that  of  Virgil,  but  a  complexity  that  consists  almost  wholly  in 
the  use  of  the  descending  structure. 

♦Morris:     On    Principles   and   Methods  In  Syntax. 


50  Sentence  Structure  in  Virgil 

3.    connkctivks  in  virgil 

A  study  of  the  connectives  used  by  Virgil  throws  consid- 
erable light  upon  the  manner  in  which  he  organizes  his  thought. 
For  this  purpose,  the  connectives  in  Books  II  and  VIII  of  the 
Aeneid  have  been  collected  and  compared.  Only  those  connec- 
tives which  unite  major  elements  were  considered;  those  used 
to  join  single  words  (except  predicates)  were  disregarded.  As 
in  the  case  of  subordinate  sentences,  in  grouping  the  results, 
the  functional  method  of  classification  has  been  preferred 
throughout,  i.  e.,  a  word  or  other  element  is  classified  according 
to  its  most  important  function  in  the  particular  sentence  where 
it  occurs. 

a.  Co-ordinating  Connectives. 

Of  simple  linking  or  cumulative  conjunctions,  in  Book  11,^ 
et  occurs  112  times,  que  123  times,  neque  (or  nee)  23  times, 
and  atgue  (or  ac)  18  times;  total  for  this  group,  276. 

Of  disjunctive  or  alternative  connectives,  (in  Book  II)  auf 
is  found  18  times,  ve  {seu,  neu)  7  times,  and  an  (or  forsitan) 
twice;  total  for  this  group  27. 

Of  adversative  connectives,  sed  occurs  7  times,  at  (or  ast) 
7  times,  autem  5  times,  tamen  4  times,  contra  twice,  si7i  twice, 
and  guin  {etiam)  once;  total  for  the  group,  28. 

Of  temporal  connectives,  turn  is  used  8  times,  iamque  9  times ^ 
znde  (or  deinde)  6  times,  interea  twice,  simul  twice,  hinc  once, 
and  various  others  6  times,  making  a  total  for  the  group  of  34. 

The  relative  pronoun  is  used  to  introduce  an  independent 
sentence  once. 

Of  co-ordinating  causal  conjunctions,  nam  is  used  4  times^ 
namque  5  times,  and  enim  twice;  total  for  the  group,  11. 

Of  connectives  used  to  express  consequence,  ergo  occurs  7> 
times. 

The  total  number  of  co-ordinating  connections  is  380. 

b.  Subordinating  Connectives. 

Of  subordinating  connectives,  the  relative  is  used  65  times 
in  Book  II. 


Sentence  Structure  in  Virgil  51 

Of  temporal  connectives,  ctcm  occurs  12  times,  dum  5 
times,  ut  6  times,  ubi  4  times,  donee  twice,  postquam  and 
Pruisquam  once  each,  {ex)  quo  once,  and  qiiando  once;  total 
for  the  group,  33. 

Of  conditional  conjunctions,  si  is  found  26  times,  and  ni 
and  sin  twice  each ;   total  30, 

Of  connectives  used  to  introduce  an  indirect  question  ut  is 
used  once,  ne  twice,  qui  and  quae  once  each,  and  quo  and  ubi 
once;  total  7. 

Of  connectives,  introducing  purpose  clauses,  ut  is  used  4 
times,  and  ne  twice;  total  6. 

Clauses  used  primarily  to  denote  manner  and  comparison 
are  introduced  by  ceu  twice,  by  qualis  twice,  by  veluti  once ; 
total  5. 

Subordinate  adversative  clauses  are  introduced  by  quamvis 
once,  and  once  by  etsi;  total  2. 

Clauses  used  primarily  to  denote  place  are  introduced  by 
quocunique  once,  and  by  ubi  twice;  total  3. 

The  total  number  of  subordinating  connectives  in  Book  II 
is  151. 

The  number  of  co-ordinating  connectives  in  Book  II  is 
thus  seen  to  be  approximately  two  and  one-half  times  as  great 
as  the  number  of  subordinating  connectives,  indicating  a  mark- 
ed preference  on  the  part  of  the  poet  for  co-ordinating  con- 
structions. In  many  cases,  the  co-ordination  results  from  the 
fact  that  the  writer  has  not  seen  fit  to  define  accurately  the 
relation  existing  between  the  clauses.  Many  clauses  which  in 
prose  would  ordinarily  be  placed  in  subordination  with  a  defin- 
ite relationship  expressed,  are  loosely  joined  together  by  Vir- 
gil, and  the  reader  is  left  to  determine  the  relation  more  closely 
or  not  as  he  feels  incited.  The  function  of  the  recipient  is 
larger  in  discourse  of  this  type ;  he  has  a  greater  feeling  of  lib- 
erty. Such  a  form  of  expression  also  allows  both  author  and 
recipient  to  concentrate  their  attention  and  energy  upon  the 
content,  rone,  or  color  of  the  separate  elemeiits  of  thought, 
since  thoy  are  released  from  the  necessity  of  holding  large 
units  in  mind  and  discriminating  exactly  the  relations  of  the 
components  to  one  another  and  to  the  whole. 


-52  Sentence  Structure  in  Virgil 

The  same  general  tendency  is  observable  in  the  remark- 
ably large  proportion  of  the  simple  linking  or  cumulative  con- 
junctions, as  compared  with  other  co-ordinating  conjunctions 
which  express  more  exact  relations.  There  are  very  nearly 
two  and  three-quarters  times  as  many  of  the  first  class  as  of  all 
the  other  classes  of  co-ordinating  connectives  combined,  i.  e., 
disjunctive,  adversative,  temporal,  causal,  consequential,  and 
relative.  Among  these  cumulative  conjunctions,  the  fact  that 
less  than  nine  per  cent  are  negative  is  also  significant.  It 
shows  that  Virgil's  style  is  positive  rather  than  negative.  This 
is  still  further  borne  out  by  the  small  number  of  adversative 
connectives — scarcely  more  than  seven  per  cent  of  the  total 
number  of  co-ordinating  conjunctions. 

Among  the  connectives  that  express  more  exact  relations, 
both  co-ordinating  and  subordinating,  the  temporal  connectives 
are  most  numerous.  This  indicates  a  tendency  toward  a  some- 
what primitive  or  elemental  style.  In  the  language  of  primi- 
tive people  and  of  children,  temporal  and  conditional  limita- 
tions are  among  the  first  limitations  to  appear.  Among  the 
subordinating  connectives,  conditional  conjunctions  are  next 
in  number  to  temporal  ones  in  this  book.  Of  subordinating 
connectives,  relative  connections  are  much  the  most  numerous, 
amounting  to  43  per  cent  of  the  whole  number.  As  already 
pointed  out,  the  majority  of  these  introduce  clauses  that  make 
an  additional  statement,  i.  e.,  that  are  of  the  nature  of  associa- 
tive additions.  As  a  connective,  the  relative  establishes  a  com- 
paratively close  grammatical  relationship,  but  the  thought  re- 
lations indicated  are  usually  rather  loose.  In  definiteness  of 
logical  relationship,  relative  connectives  occupy  a  position  mid- 
way between  simple  cumulative  connectives  and  those  which 
indicate  relations  of  time,  cause,  purpose,  etc.  Virgil's  large 
use  of  relative  connections,  therefore,  is  another  factor  con- 
tributing to  relatively  large  freedom  for  interpretation  on  the 
part  of  the  reader. 

The  extremely  limited  number  of  connectives  used  to  es- 
tablish the  more  definite  logical  relationships  is  one  of  the 
most  marked  characteristics  of  our  poet's  style.  The  number 
of  connectives  introducing  clauses  of  purpose,  clauses  of  cause, 
and  subordinate  adversative  clauses  is  scarcely  more  than  five 
per  cent  of  the  whole  number  of  subordinating  connectives. 
In  fact,  no  clauses  of  cause  at  all  were  noted  in  the  second  book 
of  the  Acneid. 


Sentence  Structure  in  Virgil  55- 

The  connectives  of  Book  VIII  are  used  in  almost  the  same 
proportions.  The  larger  proportion  of  disjunctive  connectives 
in  Book  II  as  compared  with  Book  VIII  is  probably  due  in  part 
to  the  poet's  desire  to  portray  the  perplexity  and  indecision 
of  the  Trojans  during  the  sack  and  burning  of  the  city.  The 
slightly  larger  proportion  of  temporal  connectives  in  Book 
VIII  as  compared  with  Book  11  is  probably  due  to  the  larger 
proportion  of  narration  (rather  than  description)  in  the  former 
book.  The  same  reason  probably  accounts  in  part  for  the 
smaller  number  of  conditional  sentences  in  Book  VIII.  With 
these  exceptions,  the  relative  proportions  observed  in  the  use 
of  the  various  classes  of  connectives  in  Book  II  hold  with  sur- 
prising closeness  in  Book  VIII.  In  both  there  is  the  same  pref- 
erence for  co-ordination,  and  for  the  use  of  the  connectives 
which  indicate  relations  less  exactly,  as  compared  with  those 
which  indicate  more  exact  logical  relations.  The  writer  is  in- 
tent upon  the  content  of  each  element  as  it  appears,  and  the 
reader  is  left  to  build  up  the  larger  logical  fabric  of  thought 
more  in  harmony  with  the  tendencies  of  his  own  mental  dispo- 
sition. 

A  strictly  psychological  treatment  should  also  take  some 
account  of  various  other  means  of  indicating  the  relationship 
in  thought  between  successive  portions  of  discourse  besides  the 
words  conventionally  classed  as  connectives.  Prominent 
among  these  are  the  demonstrative  pronouns  and  such  words 
as  sirmil,  iamqne,  item,  qiiin,  ivsuper  and  tandem.  Thoug'ht 
connections  and  divisions  are  also  sometimes  indicated  by  sim- 
ilarity ia  position  of  corresponding  words  in  successive  sen- 
tences, and  even,  in  some  instances,  by  the  nature  of  the  verb 
itself  in  the  sentence,  e.  g^..  the  use  of  dixerat  to  mark  the 
close  of  a  quotation.  Such  means  of  indicating  the  looser 
thought  relationships  occur  with  moderate  frequency  in  the 
Aeneid.  while  exact  designations  of  time  like  proximo  die, 
posiridie  eins  diei,  etc.,  so  frequent  in  Caesar's  Gallic  War  and 
other  narrative  literature,  and  inferential  particles  and  other 
words  used  to  denote  the  more  exact  logical  relationships,  suck 
as  itaque,  igitur,  and  deiitde,  frequent  in  Cicero's  Orations  and 
other  argumentative  works,  are  relatively  infrequent  in  the 
Aeneid. 


54  Sentence  Structure  in  Virgil 

4     participial  constructions. 

The  system  of  graphic  representation  here  employed  takes 
into  account  only  the  major  elements  of  the  sentence.  Of  the 
minor  elements,  aside  from  the  direct  object,  the  most  import- 
ant are  participial  constructions.  One  is  impressed,  however, 
by  the  finite  nature  of  Virgil's  sentence  structure.  The  more 
important  factors  in  the  sentence  are  almost  invariably  ex- 
pressed by  finite  verbs  (or  by  infinitives  in  indirect  discourse). 
Only  accessory  and  comparatively  unimportant  ideas  are 
■couched  in  participial  forms  of  expression.  The  system  of 
graphic  symbols  is  therefore  a  more  adequate  representation  of 
Virgil's  sentence  framework  than  it  would  be  of  that  of  many 
prose  writers.  The  participial  constructions  in  Virgil  are 
usually  short.  Only  about  seventy  of  those  of  Book  VIII  in- 
volve more  than  two  words.  No  regularity  in  the  position  of 
such  groups  was  observed. 

5.     THE     EFFECT    OF     EMOTIONAL    CONTENT    UPON     VIRGIL'S 
SENTENCE  STRUCTURE. 

In  the  endeavor  to  analyze  the  effect  of  strong  emotion 
upon  senlenee  structure  in  Virgil,  we  meet  with  very  complex 
and  even  contradictory  data.  We  shall  naturally  deal  more  es- 
pecially with  the  subject  matter  of  the  fourth  book  of  the 
Aeneid  in  this  connection,  as  that  book  contains  by  far  the 
largest  number  of  passages  characterized  by  deep  feeling.  Dido, 
Aeneas,  and  the  gods  are  the  chief  interlocutors,  and  the  larger 
part  of  the  book  is  comprised  in  their  various  speeches.  Among 
them  all,  the  gods  are  the  only  ones  who  present  any  consistent 
characteristics  as  far  as  the  sentence  structure  is  concerned. 
The  ascending  and  intermediate  structure  which  is  employed  in 
their  speeches  comports  well  with  their  dignity  and  authority. 
The  speech  of  Juno  to  Venus,  lines  115-127,  and  that  of  Jupiter 
to  Mercury,  lines  223-237,  are  cases  in  point. 

The  conflict  of  passion  and  pathos  in  the  words  with  which 
Dido  addresses  Aeneas  in  lines  305-330  is  clearly  reflected  in 
the  irregiilar  and  involved  sentence  structure,  which  almost  de- 
fies graphic  representation. 

The  tendency  toward  the  isolated  form  is  noticeable  here, 
though  less  conspicuous  because,  as  we  have  seen,  it  is  a  prom- 
inent feature  of  Virgil's  style,  even  in  unimpassioned  portions 


Sentence  Structure  in  Virgil  55 

of  the  text.  Perhaps  the  best  illustration  of  isolation  due  to 
the  influence  of  emotion  is  seen  in  the  words  of  Anna  when 
the  news  of  Dido's  death  reaches  her,  lines  675-684. 

On  the  other  hand,  in  one  of  the  most  passionate  outbursts 
in  the  whole  book.  Dido's  words  to  Aeneas  in  lines  365-387, 
Virgil  varies  only  slightly  from  the  customary  even  flow  of 
his  sentence  structure.  There  is  the  same  lack  of  complexity, 
the  associative  linking,  and  even  the  double  sentences.  The 
tendency  toward  isolation  is,  however,  somewhat  more  in  evi- 
dence here  than  in  Virgil's  customary  style. 

In  Virgil's  ordinary  style  it  is  usually  easy  to  distinguish 
the  limits  of  the  larger  units  of  thought  in  the  succession  of 
short,  simple  sentences.  One  of  the  most  uniform  r'^suUs  of 
strong  emotion  is  the  fact  that  the  boundaries  of  these  logical 
groups  become  difficult  to  trace  or  are  wholly  obliterated, 
leaving  only  a  rapid  series  of  short,  sharp  sentences.  This  is 
noticeable  in  the  outcry  of  Anna  already  referred  to,  lines 
675-684,  and  in  the  speech  of  Dido  to  Aeneas,  lines  305-330. 

In  general,  one  is  surprised  at  the  extent  to  which  even 
the  more  impassioned  parts  of  the  work  conform  to  the  poet's 
ordinary  style,  rather  than  at  the  number  or  extent  of  the 
changes  in  the  organization  of  the  thought  due  to  emotional 
content.  One  or  two  conclusions  seem  fairly  clear:  the  poet 
is  capable  of  deep  feeling;  indeed,  he  is  peculiarly  prone  to 
pity  and  to  pathos;  but  his  temperament  is  adapted  rather  to 
the  passive  contemplation  of  the  tragedies  of  human  experi- 
ence than  to  the  active  expression  of  passion  or  emotion.  In 
a  passage  involving  deep  feeling,  the  usual  sentence  structure  is 
sometimes  continued  until  the  middle  of  the  passage  is  reach- 
ed ;  then,  for  a  sentence  or  t\vo,  the  poet  seems  affected  by  some 
disturbing  influence,  which  upsets  the  usual  movement  of 
thought ;  but  the  steady  forward  movement  is  quickly  resumed, 
and  usually  continued  until  the  end  of  the  passage.  This  would 
seem  to  indicate  that  the  writer's  style  is  a  deep-seated  habit, 
the  result  either  of  temperament,  or  of  long  and  stern  self- 
discipline,  or  of  both,  so  that  his  method  of  expression  does 
not  easily  respond  to  variations  in  the  emotional  character  of 
the  subject-matter.  Such  passages  as  Dido's  soliloquy  after 
the  embarkation  of  Aeneas,  lines  590-629,  tend  to  confirm  this 
theory. 


56  Sentence  Structure  in  Virgil 

Another  perplexing  bit  of  evidence  is  found  in  the  fact 
that  there  is  more  subordination  in  Book  IV  than  in  the  other 
books  examined.  A  high  degree  of  cortiplexity  is  usually  asso- 
ciated with  reflection  or  abstract  thought,  where  the  relations, 
between  the  elements  of  conscious  experience  are  an  important 
factor.  That  this  holds  good  for  Virgil  is  shown  by  passages  of 
a  reflective  character  like  the  words  of  Dido,  lines  15-19,  and 
those  of  Venus,  lines  110-112 :  The  third  degree  of  complexity^ 
found  in  the  first  of  these  two  passages,  is  unusual  in  Virgil. 
But  Book  IV  is  distinguished  from  all  the  other  books  of  the 
Aeneid  by  the  large  extent  to  which  the  emotional  element  en- 
ters. Nevertheless,  Book  IV  has  over  fourteen  per  cent  more 
subordinate  sentences  (in  proportion  to  its  length)  than  the 
average  of  the  four  books  examined.  In  the  majority  of  in- 
stances, moreover,  the  sentences  which  manifest  the  most  com- 
plex and  irregular  structure  occur  in  the  most  impassioned 
portions  of  the  book.  On  the  other  hand,  Book  II,  in  which  the 
story  of  the  tragedy  of  Troy  is  recounted  after  the  event,  con- 
tains nearly  sixteen  per  cent  less  subordination  than  the  aver- 
age for  the  four  books.  These  facts  go  to  show  that  Virgil  has 
carried  his  natural  tendency  toward  a  simple  style  to  such  an 
extreme  that  the  introduction  of  passages  of  an  emotional 
character  acts  as  a  disturbing  element,  causing  him  to  return  to 
a  more  normal  proportion  of  simple  and  complex  sentences. 

Still  another  fact  looking  toward  the  same  conclusion  i& 
found  in  the  structure  of  the  numerous  similes,  which  are  con- 
siderably more  complex  than  most  of  the  work.  These  are  of 
two  types :  in  one  the  subordinate  construction  is  carried 
through  to  the  end,  while  in  the  other  it  is  carried  through  only 
one  or  two  sentences,  and  then  the  comparison  is  finished  in  in- 
dependent construction.  The  similes  in  lines  468-473  and  402- 
407  conform  to  these  two  types,  respectively.  The  similes  are 
not  a  spontaneous  production  of  the  author,  but  a  literary  con- 
vention borrowed  from  the  Greek,  and  from  their  nature  not 
readily  reducible  to  the  Virgilian  manner  of  expression.  They 
therefore  enter  as  a  more  or  less  disturbing  element  in  the  or- 
ganization of  the  poet's  thought, 

6.     SUMMARY  OF  VIRGILIAN  CHARACTERISTICS. 

In  briefly  summarizing  the  chief  characteristics  of  Virgil's 
style,  we  may  observe  that  he  manifests  a  tendency  to  employ 


Sentence  Structure  in  Vikgil  57 

short  sentences  and  sentence  groups  of  moderate  length.  Ir- 
regular and  involved  sentences,  and  those  sentence  forms 
which  involve  long  suspense  very  seldom  occur.  One  of  the 
most  marked  qualities  of  his  style  is  its  remarkably  smooth, 
forward  movement,  by  successive  positive  additions.  The  gen- 
eral effect  is  cumulative ;  antitheses  and  corrections  are  sel- 
dom introduced,  and  parentheses  are  few  and  inconspicuous. 

Virgil  evinces  a  preference  for  finite  and  regular  forms 
of  expression;  abbreviated  sentences,  and  abrupt  or  startling 
forms  are  sparingly  used.  In  many  cases  groups  of  short 
simple  sentences  which  in  ordinary  prose  might  be  fused  to- 
gether into  a  single  complex  sentence  are  presented  in  co- 
ordination, following  one  another  in  the  appropriate  psycholo- 
gical order,  but  without  connectives  expressed.  This  arrange- 
ment is  stimulating  in  its  reaction  upon  the  attention  of  the 
reader.  It  calls  for  relatively  large  and  free  activity  upon  his 
part,  and  allows  more  latitude  for  interpretation  than  a  sen- 
tence structure  in  which  the  organization  is  carried  to  its  logi- 
cal completion. 

There  is  a  marked  preference  for  the  associative  type  of 
sentence  structure.  Associative  linkings  are  numerous.  The 
binary  form  of  compound  sentence  is  very  freely  employed, 
triple  associative  sentences  are  not  uncommon,  and  longer  as- 
sociative series  occur  occasionally. 

The  apperceptive  type  is  employed  about  half  as  frequent- 
ly as  in  ordinary  prose.  In  sentences  of  this  form,  the  ascend- 
ing and  intermediate  members  are  usually  brief  and  the  com- 
plexity is  seldom  carried  beyond  the  first  degree.  In  the  des- 
cending structure,  there  is  somewhat  greater  length  and  com- 
plexity, but  the  subordination  seldom  reaches  the  third  degree. 
In  general,  Virgil  shows  a  tendency  toward  a  larger  use  of  the 
descending  structure  than  had  been  common  before  his  time, 
thus  conducing  to  clearness,  and  emotional  content.  Of  subor- 
dinate sentences,  he  employs  temporal  and  supplementary  rela- 
tive clauses  most  frequently,  and  rarely  uses  those  which  ex- 
press the  more  exact  logical  relations.  Of  connectives,  he  uses 
a  vastly  larger  number  of  simple  linking  or  cumulative  con- 
junctions than  of  connectives  which  have  a  fuller  relational 
meaning.  Of  the  latter  class,  he  generally  prefers  those  which 
express  loose  general  relations  rather  than  those  which  express 
exact  logical  relations. 


58  Sentence  Structure  in  Virgil 

Speaking  broadly,  Virgil  represents  the  emancipation  of 
the  element  of  feeling, — the  sensitive,  aesthetic,  subjective  ele- 
ment in  literature, — and  the  organization  of  his  thought  as  ex- 
pressed in  his  language  bears  the  imprint  of  this  quality.  He 
is  the  prophet  of  the  newer  tendencies  in  Latin  literature.  His- 
torically, he  stands  at  the  threshold  of  a  new  epoch;  but  the 
more  prosaic  proposition  also  holds,  that  he  is  also  the  prophet 
and  himself  the  incarnation  of  the  later  development  of  the 
Latin  tongue.  In  the  hero  of  his  greatest  masterpiece,  Virgil 
has  striven  to  conform  to  the  national  traditions — the  ancient 
ideals  of  his  countrymen — and  it  is  precisely  here  that  the  poet 
is  least  successful.  Similarly,  when  he  expresses  himself  after 
the  model  of  the  elaborate,  complex  structure  of  earlier  Latin, 
he  is  least  successful,  least  Virgilian. 


IV.     THE  SENTENCE  STRUCTURE  OF  OVID  AND  THE 
LATER  EPIC  WRITERS  COMPARED  WITH  VIRGIL. 

The  value  of  comparisons  between  Virgil's  sentence 
structure  and  that  of  later  epic  writers  is  impaired  to  a  large 
extent  by  the  fact  that  Virgil's  work  was  almost  immediately 
accepted  as  a  canon  of  literary  execution,  and  was  copied 
with  the  most  painstaking  minuteness  by  nearly  all  the  writers 
who  aspired  to  compose  in  the  same  or  a  similar  field.  Never- 
theless, v.'e  shall  not  fail  to  find,  even  here,  evidences  of  the 
writer's  literary  personality  appearing  through  the  outward 
garb  of  conventional  imitation.  The  most  important  works  for 
our  purpose  are  the  Pharsalia  of  Lucan,  the  Thebaid  of  Papin- 
ius  Stafcius,  the  Punic  War  of  Silius  Italicus,  and  the  Argon- 
autiea  of  Valerius  Flaccus.  Another  writer  of  hexameter  is 
also  of  interest  in  this  connection, — Ovid,  in  the  serai-epic  of  the 
Metamorphoses. 

1.  OVID. 
Taking  these  in  chronological  order,  we  have  first  to  deal 
with  Ovid.  The  sentence  structure  of  the  Metamorphoses 
bears  much  resemblance  to  that  of  Virgil  in  the  broad  lines  of 
its  organization.  It  is  not  characterized  by  a  high  degree  of 
complexity,  and  it  is  associative  to  a  very  considerable  degree. 
When  graphically  represented,  it  impresses  one  at  first  more 
by  its  similarity  than  by  its  differences.  On  closer  inspection, 
however,  it  will  be  noticed  that  there  is  somewhat  more  com- 
plexity in  Ovid,  with  slightly  less  use  of  the  descending  struc- 
ture, and  a  considerably  greater  use  of  the  ascending  and  es- 
pecially ol  the  intermediate.  Ovid  seldom  uses  more  than  two 
degrees  of  complexity,  and  the  second  degree  is  much  more  apt 
to  occur  in  the  ascending  or  in  the  intermediate  structure  than 
in  the  descending  structure.  The  binary  structure  occurs  oc- 
casionally, but  is  more  apt  to  be  found  in  combination  than 
alone.  Larger  combinations  of  associative  elements  are  fre- 
quent; groups  of  three  are  common,  and  four,  five,  six,  or 
even  seven  members  in  such  a  chain  are  not  uncommon.  But 
the  links  of  these  longer  chains  usually  consist  of  subjects  or 
predicates  alone,  not  usually  of  complete  sentences.  From  the 
point  of  view  of  the  impression  made  by  the  reading  of  pas- 
sages from  each  author,  the  prime  characteristic  of  Virgil's 


60  Sentenck  Structure  in  Virgil 

style  is  its  smooth,  onward  flow;  that  of  Ovid's  style,  the  re- 
markable way  in  which  each  unit  of  thought  is  rounded  off, 
finished,  and  set  by  itself.  Practically  all  the  peculiarities 
noted  above  contribute  to  this  end.  The  ascending  structure, 
especially  when  the  subordinate  sentences  are  rather  long  and 
complex,  produces  a  feeling  of  suspense  and  emphasizes  the 
principal  sentence,  and  the  intermediate  structure  tends  to  pro- 
duce a  closer  unity  in  the  sentence  whole  in  which  it  is  used. 
This  tendency  is  still  further  accentuated  by  the  fact  that  there 
are  fewer  associative  Unkings  in  Ovid  than  in  Virgil,  and  more 
collocation  without  connectives  expressed.  Even  in  the  asso- 
ciative chains,  the  fact  that  usually  only  sentence  elements 
rather  than  sentences  are  joined  together  conduces  to  the  im- 
pression of  unity.  Possibly,  Ovid's  extensive  use  of  the  elegiac 
distich  may  have  furthered  this  tendency. 

2.  LUCAN. 

Of  all  the  epic  poets  of  the  first  century  A.  D.,  Lucan 
shows  the  most  boldness  and  originality  in  style — or  perhaps  it 
would  be  nearer  the  truth  to  say  that  he  is  dominated  more 
than  the  others  by  Alexandrian  influence  and  less  by  Virgil.  At 
any  rate,  his  sentence  structure  differs  most  vddely  from  that  of 
Virgil,  and  contains  the  greatest  latitude  of  variation  within 
itself  of  all  the  epic  writers  of  this  period.  His  most  noticeable 
characteristic  is  the  frequent  use  of  long  ascending  construc- 
tions. Such  ascending  sentences  with  from  three  to  six  sub- 
ordinate members  are  not  uncommon.  He  creates  a  situation 
in  great  detail,  into  which  the  principal  member  is  finally 
thrust  Avith  tremendous  emphasis.  Often  a  long  series  of  sub- 
jects is  joined  with  a  single  predicate.  A  second  characteristic 
feature  is  his  habit  of  abrupt  and  startling  collocations.  Sev- 
eral short  sentences  which  are  evidently  felt  as  parts  of  a  larger 
whole  are  nevertheless  left  without  connecting  links  of  any 
kind  between  them.  These  two  peculiarities,  together  with 
his  bold  and  often  extravagant  diction,  unite  to  produce  the 
feeling  of  extreme  tension  or  strain  which  his  work  produces. 
Many  of  his  sentences  are  more  elaborate  than  those  of  Virgil, 
and  with  these  are  interspersed  many  series  of  short,  abrupt 
sentences.  Lucan  makes  large  use  of  associative  connections 
and  of  the  double  compound  sentence,  and  in  these  respects  as 
well  as  in  his  use  of  the  descending  structure,  he  resembles 
Virgil  closely.     He  uses  more  ascending  constructions,  how- 


Sentence  Structure  in  Virgil  61 

ever,  than  Virgil,  though  in  some  passages  he  drops  the  ascending 
form,  and  makes  large  use  of  the  descending  structure.  Prob- 
ably no  other  writer  mentioned  in  this  study  varies  so  widely 
in  different  portions  of  the  same  work. 

3     THE  EPIC  WRITERS  OF  THE  FLAVIAN  PERIOD. 

The  three  epic  poets  of  the  Flavian  period,  Valerius  Flac- 
eus,  Silius  Italieus,  and  Papinius  Statins  may  be  grouped  to- 
gether as  diligent  imitators  of  the  forms  of  Virgilian  expres- 
sion, though  falling  far  short  of  their  great  master  in  the  con- 
tent of  their  works.  Such  close  approximation  in  manner  of 
expression  on  the  part  of  poets  differing  so  widely  in  poetic 
genius  as  Virgil  and  Silius  can  hardly  be  the  result  of  similarity 
of  temperament,  but  is  probably  due  to  the  most  minute  and 
mechanical  conscious  imitation. 

a.  Valerius  Flaccus, 

In  the  Ars:onautica  of  Valerius  Flaccus  we  find  many 
very  short  sentences,  though  the  logical  groups  of  these  are 
sometimes  very  long.  The  work  is  characterized  by  lack  of 
complex  analysis.  There  are  many  series  of  short  abrupt  sen- 
tences, especially  in  the  earlier  portion  of  the  work,  impart- 
ing a  rather  rough  and  vigorous  tone.  This  characteristic  de- 
creases as  the  work  proceeds,  giving  way  to  a  more  flowing 
style.  On  the  other  hand,  there  is  an  increase  of  complexity 
in  the  later  portions  of  the  work.  The  same  types  of  ascend- 
ing and  descending  structure  as  in  Virgil  are  found,  but  there 
is  a  comparative  lack  of  intermediate  structure.  The  sentence 
structure  is  predominantly  associative.  There  is  much  binary 
structure,  and  triple  associative  chains  are  not  uncommon. 
There  are  many  more  incomplete  forms  of  expression  than  in 
Virgil,  usually  the  result  of  abbreviated  repetition. 

b.  Silius  Italieus. 

In  the  Punica  of  Silius  Italieus  we  have  the  extreme  of  ser- 
vile imitation  of  Virgilian  form.  There  is  even  less  subordination 
than  in  the  Aeneid,  especially  less  ascending  and  intermediate 
structure.  There  is  the  same  marked  predominance  of  associative 
linking.  The  longer  associative  chains  are  freiquent,  and  there 
is  less  tendency  toward  the  isolating  structure  than  in  Virgil. 
The  binary  forms  of  expression  are  carried  to  a  great  extreme, 
so  that  what  in  Virgil  is  a  source  of  simplicity  and  elemental 


62  Sentence  Structure  in  Virgil 

strength  becomes  a  wearisome  monotony  in  Silius.  His  work 
furnishes  one  of  the  clearest  illustrations  of  the  deadening  ef- 
fect of  over-emphasis  upon  form  and  neglect  of  content  in  all 
Latin  literature.  Almost  the  only  distinguishing  feature  in  his 
style  is  his  frequent  use  of  rather  important  minor  elements, 
usually  participial  constructions,  which  most  commonly  occu- 
py an  intermediate  position  in  the  clauses  in  which  they  occur. 

c.    Papinius  Statins. 

Papinius  Statins  was  a  poet  of  much  greater  power,  al- 
though an  ardent  admirer  and  close  imitator  of  Virgil.  His 
sentence  structure  conforms  to  that  of  Virgil  in  all  its  main 
outlines,  but  in  some  minor  points  shows  the  force  of  a  distinct 
personality.  His  Thebaid  is  predominantly  associative  in 
structure.  The  binary  form  is  of  frequent  occurrence,  especial- 
ly the  full  form,  in  which  two  subjects  and  two  predicates  are 
expressed.  Sentences  with  one  subject  and  three  predicates  are 
common.  There  is  noticeably  less  isolation  than  in  Placcus  or 
Silius,  and  a  marked  tendency  toward  a  smoother,  more  flow- 
ing style.  A  tendency  toward  sentence  groups  of  moderate 
length  is  also  discernible.  Incomplete  sentences  are  very  fre- 
quent, giving  a  concise,  somewhat  epigrammatic  character  to 
some  portions  of  the  text.  There  is  very  little  complexity,  the 
ascending  structure  in  particular  being  of  infrequent  occur- 
rence. 


V.     THE   AUTHENTICITY  OF   THE   SO-CALLED    MINOR 
VIRGILIAN  WORKS. 

An  interesting  application  of  the  method  of  study  of  sen- 
tence structure  here  employed  is  its  use  in  connection 
with  the  problem  of  the  authenticity  of  the  minor  works  which 
have  been  ascribed  to  Virgil.  We  shall  consider  three  of  these : 
the  Ciris,  the  Culex,  and  the  Moretum. 

1.    THE  CIRIS. 

Of  the  Ciris,  three  portions  may  be  taken  as  fairly  repre- 
sentative :  lines  1-53  of  the  elaborate  introduction,  lines  171-190, 
which  are  of  a  narrative  character,  and  lines  220-257,  which  are 
partly  narrative  but  chiefly  the  words  of  the  aged  nurse  ad- 
dressed to  the  heroine.  The  organization  of  the  thought  in 
these  passages  is  represented  by  the  following  diagrams.  For 
purposes  of  comparison,  graphic  representations  of  the  Seventh 
Eclogue  and  of  portions  of  the  Fourth  and  Tenth  Eclogues  are 
also  introduced  at  this  point.  One  is  impressed  at  once  by  the 
wide  divergence  between  the  sentence  structure  of  the  Ciris 
and  that  of  the  authenticated  works  of  Virgil.  Virgil's  sen- 
tences aj-e  almost  always  short ;  many  of  those  in  the  Ciris  are 
inordinately  long.  The  first  two  sentences  of  the  poem  occupy 
26  lines.  Lines  181-186  comprise  but  one  sentence,  and  lines 
241-258  but  two  sentences.  Virgil  almost  never  employs  a  form 
of  sentence  which  causes  prolonged  suspense ;  his  ascending  and 
intermediate  sentences  are  very  brief:  remarkably  long  sus- 
pense is  a  very  conspicuous  feature  of  the  Ciris,  both  in  ascend- 
ing and  intermediate  constructions.  Examples  are  lines  1-11, 
42-53,  181-186,  220-223,  and  241-249.  Virgil's  structure  is  al- 
most invariably  very  simple  and  regular;  that  of  the  Ciris  is 
usually  complex,  and  exceedingly  involved  and  irregular,  ren- 
dering the  poem  unusually  difficult  to  read.  Long  sentences  in- 
volving both  ascending  and  descending  structure  are  frequent 
in  the  Ciris  and  very  rare  in  Virgil ;  the  Ciris  often  has  ascend- 
ing, descending  and  intermediate  structure  within  the  limits  of 
a  single  sentence.  Virgil  uses  parentheses  very  sparingly,  and 
exceedingly  brief  ones ;  long  and  involved  parentheses  are  very 
conspicuous  in  the  Ciris.    Finally,  the  large  use  of  associative 


64  Sentence  Structure  in  Virgil 

linking  is  one  of  the  most  deep-seated  characteristics  of  Virgil's 
genuine  works,  while  its  absence  is  a  distinctive  feature  of  the 
Ciris.  If  Virgil  wrote  the  Ciris,  he  must  have  disguised  his 
style  so  that  it  was  totally  unrecognizable,  or  else  his  style  was 
so  altered  after  its  composition  as  absolutely  to  efface  its  dis- 
tinctive characteristics.  Either  alternative  is  incredible.  The 
evidence  of  the  sentence  structure,  therefore,  is  wholly  against 
the  Virgilian  authorship  of  the  Ciris. 

CIRIS 


a        b       (a        b     I     a        b         bi)  A        B 


c         ci         d 


12 


a        b  a        b  A       B  (A         B) 


c       d        di         c  ci        d      (c      d)       c       d 

e      f     ei    fi  I  e     f      fi 
attvlb.  attrib. 

2^  a        b        a  b        (al         b 

c         d 


29 


36 


42 


171 


178 


180 


ab|a        b|a        b|a        b|a        b 

c       d 


a        b  a        b 


a         b  ill)      h  A  a         b       I      a  b  B 

c        d         ic;     dt 
*         *         *         *         * 


a        b     I     a        b       (a)         a         (>         b     |     a         d        bi 


a        b  a        b  a         b     I     a        b 


a        b  a         b  A        B 


{SENTENCE  Structure  in  Virgil  65 


181 


187 


ab(a)abbab|ab        AB{A)B  ab 

c         d 
• ^t  t  r  i  b. 


a         b  (a        b  b)  (A)        B  a  b 


***** 


220 


224 


229 


234 


237 


a        a        b         b      (  a         b)        A        B  (A)       B: 


a         ba  ab         (ab)b|a        b 

c        d 


a       a        b        b 

c        d        c        d  c        d 


(a)       b 


c         c         d         d  c         d 

attrlb. 
a  b 

c       d 


e        f        e      (e        f)      f 


241 


ab(abAB)ab       AB 


cd  cdcd(c)cdd 


^^^  a         b  a^      b        A       B  abb, 

c       d  c       d 


ECLOGUE  VII 

Non-flnlte  constructions 


a        b         a         ai 


b    V  a    (b)  la    (b)  la       b|a       b|b       b) 


66  Sentence  Structure  in  Virgil 


11 


14 


18 


21 


25 


29 


31 


33 


35 


37 


41 


44 


a         a         b         b         a        b 


a        b  AB:ab|a         ai        b        a        b         AB 


a        b     I     a         b        ai       bi 


a        b     I     a        b        ai       bi  a        b 

c        d 


a        b|a        b|a        b|a        b 
c        d 


aabb(ab)  ab  AB 


a         b  a         b         A       B 

c        d  c        d 

a         b         ai  ,   bi 


a        b  A        B 


a         b  A        B     I      a         b 


a        b  a        a         b        b 


a        b  a         b  A       B 

a        b     I     b     I     b 

c        d 

a        b     I     a        b 
c         d 


Sentence  Structure  in  Virgil 


67 


45 


(a       ai      as       a        b     i     a        b     I     a         b 
c        d 


49 


a         ai     I     a         ai  b     |      a        b 


a  ^  c       (d) 


53  Z^= 


a         aib|ab|a         b  a         bAB 


57 


a        ba         b|a         b|a         b         aib^ 


61 


a        b|a         b|a         b|a         b|a        b|a         b  A       Ai        B 


65 


a        b|a        b|a        b|a        b  a        b  A|Ai  B 


69 


a       b     I     a       b 

c        d 


ECLOGUE  IV 


a        b|abib|a        b  AB 


a        ba         b        a        b|a        b|a        b 


a        a        b        ai       bi        b     I     a        b 


11 


a         b         ai        bi         a         b         A        B 


15 


a         b         bi      (a)        b       bi 


18 


a      b     I     a       b       ai     bi     I     a        b       ai        bi       ai'    bi      |     a       b 


68  Sentence  Structure  in  Virgil 


a        b         a        b       (a)        b  A       B         a       b  ai       bi 


31 


a        b 

c       d     I     c        d     I     c        d 


a        b         a         a        b       (b)      I     a        b         ai       bi 


37 


a         b  AB        a        b|a        b|a        b|a        b         a        b 

a        b  a        b     I     a        b 

ECLOGUE  X 


a        bla^a       b       ba        b 


a       a        bb|a        b|a        b|a        b|a        b 

c       d 


a '"'  a        b        a ai        b        ao 

c         d 


a  I  a     b  I  a       ai     b       a     b  V       a      b       ai    bi  /    a     b  |  a 


b  I  a     b 


21 


26 


31 


a         b:a       b|a        b|a        b|a        b|a         b         aibi 


a        b  I  a       b:      a        b  |  a        b  I  a        b        ai       bi       a2       b2        as    bs 
c         d 


a:  a        b:       b     |     a        b 

c      d 


35         


ab       bi        b       biaa       a       b(a|a       aib)  (A)  B  |  a  b  |  a  b 

c      d 


Sentence  Structure  in  Virgil  69 

2.     THE  CULEX. 

The  Culex  manifests  quite  different  characteristics.  The 
sentences  are  mostly  of  moderate  length,  and  the  longer  ones 
are  formed  for  the  most  part  by  associative  linking  rather  than 
by  apperceptive  analysis.  Instances  of  long  suspense  do  not 
occur,  and  ascending  and  intermediate  sentences  are  rather 
short,  as  in  the  Georgics  and  the  Aeneid,  and  conform  to  the 
same  types.  There  is  less  ascending  and  intermediate  structure 
than  in  the  Ciris,  and  relatively  more  of  the  descending  struc- 
ture. There  is  somewhat  more  complexity  than  in  the  Aeneid, 
the  descending  structure  being  occasionally  carried  to  the  sec- 
ond degree  of  analysis.  In  general,  the  sentence  structure  is 
more  irregular  and  more  involved  than  in  the  authenticated 
Virgiliau  works.  Parentheses  are  infrequent,  and  usually  short. 
There  is  much  associative  linking,  and  some  binary  structure. 
The  sentence  structure  of  the  Culex  shows  no  marked  character- 
istics that  are  not  found  in  the  Virgilian  works.  On  the  other 
hand,  the  most  distinctive  traits  of  Virgil's  sentence  structure 
are  found  in  the  Culex,  but  in  less  degree.  The  testimony  of 
the  sentence  structure  then,  is  not  conclusive,  but  indicates  a 
tolerably  strong  probability  that  we  have  here,  in  basis  at  least, 
a  genuine  Virgilian  work,  of  very  early  date. 

3.    THE  MORETUM. 

In  the  Moretum  we  have  a  poem  which  differs  materially 
both  from  the  Ciris  and  from  the  Culex.  Its  sentence  structure, 
however,  is  much  farther  removed  from  the  Ciris  than  from  the 
Culex.  The  sentences  in  the  Moretum  are  usually  short,  and 
the  longer  ones  consist  of  associative  linkings,  and  not,  as  a 
rule,  of  apperceptive  analyses.  There  is  very  little  complexity ; 
this  is  usually  only  of  the  first  degree,  though  the  descending 
structure  is  two  or  three  times  carried  to  the  second  degree. 
There  is  but  little  ascending  construction, — a  fact  which  may 
be  due  in  part  to  the  extremely  simple  nature  of  the  subect 
matter, — and  there  is  a  corresponding  preponderance  of  the 
descending  structure.  The  absence  of  the  intermediate  struc- 
ture is  noticeable,  which  may  be  due  again  to  the  forward  move- 
ment of  the  simple  description  of  which  the  poem  is  made  up. 
There  is  no  long  suspense.  There  is  a  remarkably  smooth  for- 
ward flow  to  the  style,  much  associative  linking,  considerable 
binary  structure,  and  occasional  triple,  quadruple,  and  quintu- 


70  Sentence  Structure  in  Virgil 

pie  associative  chains.  Groups  of  short,  simple  sentences  com- 
posing a  logical  whole,  but  without  verbal  connection,  are  fre- 
quent. All  the  characteristics  of  the  sentence  structure  of  this 
poem  are  Virgilian  characteristics,  and  all  the  most  important 
Virgilian  characteristics  are  present  in  the  structure  of  this 
poem,  with  the  single  exception  of  the  intermediate  structure. 
Its  style  is  intermediate  between  that  of  the  Eclogues  and  that 
of  the  Georgics,  but  nearer  that  of  the  Georgics.  Proofs  deriv- 
ed  from  sentence  structure  could  not  well  go  farther  toward  the 
positive  determination  of  the  authorship  of  any  work  than 
the  proofs  in  this  case  go  toward  establishing  the  Virgilian  au- 
thorship of  the  Moretum. 

MORETUM 

a         b        ai       bi 

c       d       di      da 
e       f 


bi 


^^  abb]       b2 


13 


16 


a         b         ai        bi       b2 
c        d 


a        b     I     a        b 

c         d 


19 


24 


26 


e         f 


a         b        b]         a        b         A        B  a        b        (a)      bi 


a        b     I     a        b     I     a        b 


bi        (a       b)  a       b  bi 


29 


31 


37 


39 


42 


43 


47 


52 


56 


61 


64 


67 


69 


Sentence  Structure  in  Virgil  71 


a         b         bi      I      (a)        b 


a        b     I     (a)      b     I     (a)       b        bi      ba  I  b  |  b  |  b      b      b 


a        b       bi    bi 


a        b         A       B       Bi       a       b 


a         b         ai      b] 


a        b     I     (a)      b     I     (a)      b     I     (a)      b         (a       b 


a        b       bi      b_'  a        b       (a        b)       (a)       bi       hj 


a         a         bAB(ajbababAB 


a         b  a         a  b 


a        b 


c         c         d 


a        b     I     a        b         ai       bi       b 
c        d 


a^a         b  ab  AB 


a        b       o       o       o 


72  Sentence  Structure  in  Virgil 


72 


79 


84 


87 


92 


94 


96 


98 


103 


107 


111 


113 


116 


119 


a       (b)     I     a       ai       a2        aa        b     |     a       ai       a2       as       a4  (b) 

c        d 

(a       b)        a       b         ai       bi       a        b 


a ai         b       aa      a.s     a4 

c        d 


a         b        (a)        bi  a        b 


a        b  A        B        Bi 


b         bi     b2      bit 


a        b        bi 


a        b|a        b|a        b        bila        b  a        b 


a        b     I     a        b     I     a        b        ai      bi  b2 

c       d    c       d 


a       b  ai     bi     I     a        b        bi 


a        b     I     a        b 

(c)    d 


a        b        b]        b2      bs 


abb 

c       d 


a        b  a       b        bi        ba      bs 

o       d 


m 


lX. 


TA 


THIS  BOOK  IS  DUE  ON  THE  LAST  DATE 
STAMPED  BELOW 

AN  INITIAL  PINE  OP  25  CENTS 

T^.'rt^^  ASSESSED   FOR   FAILURE  TO   RETURN 
THIS   BOOK  ON   THE  DATE  DUE.   THE  PENAL W 

oiv'lND'T^''/^  ^°  """^^  °-  THe'four't'^ 


221937 


'ItcTTiinflrtT 


LD  21-100rn-8,'34l 


